Rate the draft!

What grade do you give Monte McNair for his first draft?

  • A

    Votes: 62 96.9%

  • B

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • C

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • D

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • E

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • F

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Incomplete

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    64
SLAB said:
from the little knowledge I have it was less a poor draft, and more a draft without many guys with big star potential.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there were no sure-thing franchise players this year which is probably where all the "terrible draft" hyperbole came from but I think there have been several years where we talk ourselves into seeing franchise players who aren't really there so that could just be a product of the college season getting cut short with no hype generating March Madness tournament. Wiseman probably should have been that clear #1 guy if he'd played a full season. And there's something to be said for depth as well. If you're picking 10th or lower it doesn't really matter how good the top 5 players are and that's most of the league. funkykingston is right that draft grades are reactionary and relatively meaningless but if nobody made an obvious mistake that does suggest there's a relative lack of high risk potential busts as well which surely pushes the overall talent average up doesn't it? I think this ultimately could be a draft we look back on in 5 years as above average just in terms of the quantity of players still in the league.
 
hrdboild said:
Not about the Fox pick. The vast majority were ecstatic we landed Fox but there was some consternation regarding the rest of the draft. Opinions were pretty mixed about the decision to trade down from 10 and take Justin Jackson and Harry Giles.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was my recollection, too. The Captain said "pick" so I was focusing on just the top pick that year.
 
Folsomkingsfan said:
Definitely not in Downtown. I was at a watch party (pretty sure it was Carmichael Dave's, but it was so crowded I am not totally sure) and the Fox chants were some of the loudest I've ever heard. The celebration in the streets after that pick is definitely one of my top Sacramento memories.
Click to expand...
I believe my son and father in law were there as well. :)
 
Warhawk said:
Fox? Was there any significant disagreement on that one? I don't remember there being much, but maybe there was....
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right - given the board there was pretty much unanimity for Fox. However, I remember there being a few folks who really wanted Josh Jackson and even more who hoped that Tatum slipped to us. So in that sense, there was unanimity that Fox was the right pick given the board, but not unanimity on Fox being the best plausible pick - pre-draft Fox wasn't consensus "best case scenario". It would seem that this year everybody is on board with Haliburton being the best plausible outcome - and you'll probably find some argument that it wasn't even all that plausible. I suppose I was feeling a bit more the "best case scenario" here and forgot about Fox being unanimously the right pick.

Hmm, let's see...the unanimously agreed upon picks have been Cousins...and Fox...and Haliburton. Not bad company.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Hmm, let's see...the unanimously agreed upon picks have been Cousins...and Fox...and Haliburton. Not bad company.
Click to expand...
I'm just clapping along with everyone else here. I didn't know anything about ANY of these guys before the draft. I'm just hoping y'all know what you are talking about. ;)
 
hrdboild said:
Not about the Fox pick. The vast majority were ecstatic we landed Fox but there was some consternation regarding the rest of the draft. Opinions were pretty mixed about the decision to trade down from 10 and take Justin Jackson and Harry Giles.
Click to expand...
exactly. Fox was a no brainer great pick. It’s also not like he fell a great distance like Haliburton did for us to pick him though in hindsight he deserved to go higher. It’s the rest of that first round that went south and for some of us we felt that on draft day, no hindsight.
Yesterday’s draft appears all around solid, logical, and a good amount of good fortune included.
 
hrdboild said:
Legit question: if this is a poor draft, why did nbadraft.net rate every one of the first 15 picks as either an A or a B in their post-draft analysis?

https://www.nbadraft.net/2020-nba-draft-instant-analysis/
Click to expand...

Lack of obvious star talent on a draft is a big part of wether the draft is good or bad since star players are what determine which teams are good and which aren't. Also sites like nbadraft arent end all be all, they have been extremely wrong on their big boards before so their draft grades a day after draft arent that important. To me there are picks in the top 15 that probably shouldnt get a grade of B or better.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Yeah, you're right - given the board there was pretty much unanimity for Fox. However, I remember there being a few folks who really wanted Josh Jackson and even more who hoped that Tatum slipped to us. So in that sense, there was unanimity that Fox was the right pick given the board, but not unanimity on Fox being the best plausible pick - pre-draft Fox wasn't consensus "best case scenario". It would seem that this year everybody is on board with Haliburton being the best plausible outcome - and you'll probably find some argument that it wasn't even all that plausible. I suppose I was feeling a bit more the "best case scenario" here and forgot about Fox being unanimously the right pick.

Hmm, let's see...the unanimously agreed upon picks have been Cousins...and Fox...and Haliburton. Not bad company.
Click to expand...

I don't know that Haliburton was the slam dunk best talent available, but I also don't know that he wasn't if that makes any sense. My solid A grade is really for the overall haul of all three players -- getting value and filling needs with all 3 picks. There are a lot of players I liked for us this year and some of them may wind up having better careers with their teams but we can only really judge based on what we know now and in that context we got a very good talent who looks like he'll be an impact player on both ends, knows how to play within himself, and won't make a lot of mistakes. That could be huge for us because I feel like we've specialized in drafting talented players who can't get out of their own way. I stand by my assertion that there's a surprise perennial All-Star hidden somewhere in this draft. I don't know who it is though so I'm just happy we made picks that made sense.
 
funkykingston said:
Love the picks.

I could quibble a bit and say that had we stayed at 35 a combo of Elijah Hughes and Jordan Nwora might have been my preference. Or that Paul Reed (who is an analytics darling and does a bit of everything, especially on defence) was worth a flyer at #52.

But Haliburton is a fantastic compliment to Fox. He provides a lot of what made Bogi a good fit with De'Aaron (secondary ballhander, passing, shooting, feel for the game) but Tyrese is younger, a better passer, and will likely be a very good defender in time. As long as Buddy is a King, there's a very solid three guard rotation.

Woodard is a high floor, low ceiling guy who I'd be really surprised if he doesn't carve out a long NBA career. Good defender, improving shooter and a guy who does the little things.

Ramsey is an upside pick. Some very solid tools but lots of areas of development. Good shooter but poor shot selection. Shows flashes on defense but is better off ball than on where he's inconsistent and has poor fundamentals. Is more of a momentum athlete than an explosive one. Needs to tighten his handle and work on his left hand. Not much of a playmaker at all So a lot to work on, but his upside if he develops is as a microwave/6th man scorer who also provides very good defense.

On paper McNair & co had a very solid first draft. So much more work to do but it's encouraging to think that we might have a good front office for the first time in a very long time.
Click to expand...

The only part of your analysis I would disagree with on Ramsey, and that's based on the games I saw, which wasn't as many as a player like Haliburton etc. is on his shot selection. In the games I watched I was impressed with his shot selection. But then, I didn't see every game he played. But aside from that, he's a high upside player who is an elite athlete who defends. Texas Tech plays an NBA motion offense which will help Ramsey transition easier to the next level.

While I agree that the ceiling isn't has high with Woodard, I do think he has areas of improvement that could move him up a couple of levels. His ballhandling is an area that could help him become more of a complete perimeter player. He played PF in high school and as a result didn't put a lot of emphasis on his handles. But if he can improve in that area, his ability to create his own shot will improve. But for now, 3 and D is just fine.

All Haliburton needs to do is get stronger. Other than that he has no apparent weaknesses that leap out at you. Finishing at the basket, and fighting through screens are the main areas he needs to improve, and he will simply by getting stronger. I'am still stunned that he slid to us at 12. There are some GM's that are going to regret passing on Tyrese. But I'm happy they did!
 
I basically only watched YouTube draft videos and came away impressed with Ramsey and Woodard, pretty funny that they both got picked. Didnt know anything about Haliburton but he looks pretty smooth, just needs some NBA strength.
 
hrdboild said:
I don't know that Haliburton was the slam dunk best talent available, but I also don't know that he wasn't if that makes any sense. My solid A grade is really for the overall haul of all three players -- getting value and filling needs with all 3 picks. There are a lot of players I liked for us this year and some of them may wind up having better careers with their teams but we can only really judge based on what we know now and in that context we got a very good talent who looks like he'll be an impact player on both ends, knows how to play within himself, and won't make a lot of mistakes. That could be huge for us because I feel like we've specialized in drafting talented players who can't get out of their own way. I stand by my assertion that there's a surprise perennial All-Star hidden somewhere in this draft. I don't know who it is though so I'm just happy we made picks that made sense.
Click to expand...

If I had to pick out a player that I thought was a sure fire star it would be Obi Toppin. Because of his talent, of course, but also because of his personality. If you were to watch one of his games and no nothing about him, you would come away talking about him. He has a flair about everything he does. He's one of those bigger than life kind of players. I would compare his arrival to the NBA as similar to Blake Griffins. Except Toppin is already a good 3 pt shooter.

Another player that I think will be a star is Kira Lewis Jr.. Being a PG he'll have the ball in his hands, and he knows what to do with it. I see a path similar to Ja Morant and Fox. I also wouldn't count out our own Tyrese Haliburton. I still think he's the best player in this draft, but we'll see... Hey, I don't want to put pressure on him.......:p
 
bajaden said:
The only part of your analysis I would disagree with on Ramsey, and that's based on the games I saw, which wasn't as many as a player like Haliburton etc. is on his shot selection. In the games I watched I was impressed with his shot selection. But then, I didn't see every game he played. But aside from that, he's a high upside player who is an elite athlete who defends. Texas Tech plays an NBA motion offense which will help Ramsey transition easier to the next level.
Click to expand...

That's funny. I also didn't see a lot of his games and had the opposite opinion on his shot selection. I want to say it was the Kansas game where he scored 20+ points but took a ton of shots. A lot of them early on the clock and/or with a hand in his face. Just really forced things. And he really didn't add anything else beyond that. I liked that he was aggressive on offense and could create his own shot but it was frustrating to watch his shot selection.

Even it that game you could see that when he got his feet set on a good look he was a good shooter.

But a couple weeks after that he had a better game against Iowa State and Haliburton. Still shot mostly 3's but hit them and moved the ball more.

I think he'll figure it out in the NBA. He's got great footwork and nice shot mechanics.
 
hrdboild said:
Not about the Fox pick. The vast majority were ecstatic we landed Fox but there was some consternation regarding the rest of the draft. Opinions were pretty mixed about the decision to trade down from 10 and take Justin Jackson and Harry Giles.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that we had to swap with Philly who blew all their marbles trading our pick to trade up.
 
I don't feel equipped to grade especially with no NCAA tourney this year to get a good look at guys. But I definitely feel good about getting our guy at 12 and I definitely feel like this FO isn't trying to outsmart itself like some in the past.
 
bajaden said:
The only part of your analysis I would disagree with on Ramsey, and that's based on the games I saw, which wasn't as many as a player like Haliburton etc. is on his shot selection. In the games I watched I was impressed with his shot selection. But then, I didn't see every game he played. But aside from that, he's a high upside player who is an elite athlete who defends. Texas Tech plays an NBA motion offense which will help Ramsey transition easier to the next level.

While I agree that the ceiling isn't has high with Woodard, I do think he has areas of improvement that could move him up a couple of levels. His ballhandling is an area that could help him become more of a complete perimeter player. He played PF in high school and as a result didn't put a lot of emphasis on his handles. But if he can improve in that area, his ability to create his own shot will improve. But for now, 3 and D is just fine.

All Haliburton needs to do is get stronger. Other than that he has no apparent weaknesses that leap out at you. Finishing at the basket, and fighting through screens are the main areas he needs to improve, and he will simply by getting stronger. I'am still stunned that he slid to us at 12. There are some GM's that are going to regret passing on Tyrese. But I'm happy they did!
Click to expand...

I think Ramsey could be special and take some sting away if Buddy doesn't work out. He has some very similar strengths and weaknesses and while not the scorching scorer his handles are light years ahead of him already. And he's 19! He's got the body already and the signs of tremendous skill as a creating true SG. He could make up for that Bol Bol blunder last year. If this were a conventional draft process with workouts and such no way he's there at 43. Teams fell asleep there as well.

And yeah, Woodard, just stick to that 3 and D and you'll fit like a glove. Fox and Haliburton will need the spacing.
 
funkykingston said:
That's funny. I also didn't see a lot of his games and had the opposite opinion on his shot selection. I want to say it was the Kansas game where he scored 20+ points but took a ton of shots. A lot of them early on the clock and/or with a hand in his face. Just really forced things. And he really didn't add anything else beyond that. I liked that he was aggressive on offense and could create his own shot but it was frustrating to watch his shot selection.

Even it that game you could see that when he got his feet set on a good look he was a good shooter.

But a couple weeks after that he had a better game against Iowa State and Haliburton. Still shot mostly 3's but hit them and moved the ball more.

I think he'll figure it out in the NBA. He's got great footwork and nice shot mechanics.
Click to expand...

Remember this, he's 19 years old. If he were Justin James' age it's a different story. He's got good size for a SG/combo with both length and athleticism. He already shows signs of walking and chewing gum to boot. This could be your steal right here.
 
Iced Espresso said:
Now that 40 has been confirmed as our guy, I still give them an A, I just can't stand CC ever for asset loss.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as I've mentioned (maybe too many times) Paul Reed was my guy at 52. But I was also high on Grant Riller. I'll definitely be keeping an eye on how they do going forward.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Yeah, you're right - given the board there was pretty much unanimity for Fox. However, I remember there being a few folks who really wanted Josh Jackson and even more who hoped that Tatum slipped to us. So in that sense, there was unanimity that Fox was the right pick given the board, but not unanimity on Fox being the best plausible pick - pre-draft Fox wasn't consensus "best case scenario". It would seem that this year everybody is on board with Haliburton being the best plausible outcome - and you'll probably find some argument that it wasn't even all that plausible. I suppose I was feeling a bit more the "best case scenario" here and forgot about Fox being unanimously the right pick.

Hmm, let's see...the unanimously agreed upon picks have been Cousins...and Fox...and Haliburton. Not bad company.
Click to expand...

It was another one of those deals where we weren't talking about Fox because we didn't expect him to be on the board. Most were talking about Tatum, Markkanen, Isaac and Smith Jr if I recall right. I remember people being afraid of Tatum being Melo 2.0.

So far we're batting 1.000 when it comes to unanimous picks so lets hope the trend continues.
 
ESP47 said:
It was another one of those deals where we weren't talking about Fox because we didn't expect him to be on the board. Most were talking about Tatum, Markkanen, Isaac and Smith Jr if I recall right. I remember people being afraid of Tatum being Melo 2.0.

So far we're batting 1.000 when it comes to unanimous picks so lets hope the trend continues.
Click to expand...

That's a weird concern about Tatum. I mean, for one, Carmelo was a great player for a long time, and if you've got a #5 pick that develops into Carmelo, I think you're happy about it.

On the day of the 2017 lottery I was at an event in the newly-constructed Golden 1 Center where I overheard a fan ask Ailene Voisin "Fox or Tatum?" She replied, "Fox, of course!" but I recall being a bit uncertain about that, as I was convinced Tatum was going to be very good. (I feel OK on this, BTW.) But at #5, yeah, Tatum was a guy that might have been there based on the mocks, and if Fox and Tatum were gone we were worried about whether we went with Josh Jackson, or the Markkanen/Isaac/Smith conundrum, with a few people wondering whether Donovan Mitchell was a worthy stretch at #5. Fortunately, we didn't have to face that question.

And yes, let's hope that we continue to bat 1.000 on unanimous picks! :)
 
Iced Espresso said:
Well the 35 changed to 40 with that pick too you are talking about.

The 52 became a worse pick next draft for a million bucks.
Click to expand...

Not amazing, but these are the sort of moves I don't mind to appease ownership since it doesn't hurt your on-court product or future assets. You're almost never bringing in 4 rookies so you punt the 2nd, keep it as an asset in potential flips, especially since we're strongly looking at dealing 2 of our higher profile players on the team and ownership comes away happy.
 
The_Jamal said:
Not amazing, but these are the sort of moves I don't mind to appease ownership since it doesn't hurt your on-court product or future assets. You're almost never bringing in 4 rookies so you punt the 2nd, keep it as an asset in potential flips, especially since we're strongly looking at dealing 2 of our higher profile players on the team and ownership comes away happy.
Click to expand...
Right. As it is, even without the Bogi sign-and-trade players and assuming both he AND our other free agents are all gone, this team is short on roster space.


Holmes/Bagley
Bjeli/Parker
Barnes/Jeffries (+Woodard)
Buddy/Justin James (+Haliburton) (+Ramsey)
Fox/Joseph/Guy

While using that last 2nd rounder on a big to boost our depth would have been nice, there’s a good chance he wouldn’t have wound up on the team.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
That's a weird concern about Tatum. I mean, for one, Carmelo was a great player for a long time, and if you've got a #5 pick that develops into Carmelo, I think you're happy about it.

On the day of the 2017 lottery I was at an event in the newly-constructed Golden 1 Center where I overheard a fan ask Ailene Voisin "Fox or Tatum?" She replied, "Fox, of course!" but I recall being a bit uncertain about that, as I was convinced Tatum was going to be very good. (I feel OK on this, BTW.) But at #5, yeah, Tatum was a guy that might have been there based on the mocks, and if Fox and Tatum were gone we were worried about whether we went with Josh Jackson, or the Markkanen/Isaac/Smith conundrum, with a few people wondering whether Donovan Mitchell was a worthy stretch at #5. Fortunately, we didn't have to face that question.

And yes, let's hope that we continue to bat 1.000 on unanimous picks! :)
Click to expand...

I think people were thinking he was the ball stopper, empty stats type who wasn't going to make his teammates better and was going to make everything about him, despite the W/L record. He's proven that wrong already.

Even though Tatum has technically been better than Fox, I still think Fox was the right pick for this team due to position alone.

We're all just glad that Josh Jackson didn't "fall" to us. He looked like a better version of Tatum in college.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top