Draft Day Winners And Losers

[Pelicanidae]

Hmmm, I see your point but I think the Warriors are accustomed to playing Green at C situationally so it won't slow them down much and gives them another dynamic we haven't really seen before in their Curry era. Happy to he wrong but I think Wiseman really works for them here and now.

I don't think Wiseman was an awful choice because he's going to have a very simplified role and he won't have too much asked of him due to Green and Curry and whatnot, I just think that when we're talking about rating the draft pick itself they could have done better. So they didn't do badly, but they left some value on the table imo, especially for playoff situations where Wiseman will have more trouble.

That said, Mannion at 48 was good value.

[da ThRONe]

This is exactly what a lot of people don't seem to be getting that's actually extremely important. I keep seeing people on here, on Twitter, on instagram, etc, look at given picks or trade moves or whatever and say ''how does this help us now?'' or ''how does X player fit with Y player, long term?'' and that is really not the point.

I'll give an example. Immediately after we drafted Kira, twitter was inundated with ''how does Kira fit with Lonzo?''

The answer is, who cares? The only players we have long term investment in right now are Zion and to a slightly lesser extent Ingram. If Kira is fantastic for us but ends up not fitting at all with Lonzo it doesn't matter because we can just move Lonzo in time, it really doesn't matter. We have no requirement to make drafting or trade decisions around Lonzo Ball.

The same is true elsewhere as well. Don't ask how any given trade helps us win next year, because that's not the point. Ask how the moves we make add up towards long term winning in the future.

So you don't think Ingram is here on a max contract in the next few days? That's the problem with the deal that brought us Ingram. The min any player that is considered part of the core is off their rookie deal that team is on the clock to be winners sooner rather than later. We need if not proven ballers atleast guys with promise. What we don't need are assets in the 2024 draft. Now obviously those assets can be traded, but when you trade for a guy that'll be a restricted free agent you have to understand you speed up your rebuild more than trading for rookies and future draft picks.

[da ThRONe]

I don't think Wiseman was an awful choice because he's going to have a very simplified role and he won't have too much asked of him due to Green and Curry and whatnot, I just think that when we're talking about rating the draft pick itself they could have done better. So they didn't do badly, but they left some value on the table imo, especially for playoff situations where Wiseman will have more trouble.

That said, Mannion at 48 was good value.

I think Wiseman to the GS Warriors is huge. When a big can play in today's space and pace game that gives them a huge advantage. Wiseman has the physical tools to be on the court during important mins even on a team like GS that traditionally likes to go small in those situations. IMO James is a game changer for GS. If he actually can extend his range to the 3pt line it will be scary for the league.

[luckyman]

So you don't think Ingram is here on a max contract in the next few days? That's the problem with the deal that brought us Ingram. The min any player that is considered part of the core is off their rookie deal that team is on the clock to be winners sooner rather than later. We need if not proven ballers atleast guys with promise. What we don't need are assets in the 2024 draft. Now obviously those assets can be traded, but when you trade for a guy that'll be a restricted free agent you have to understand you speed up your rebuild more than trading for rookies and future draft picks.

So what in the world should they have done then? Told the Lakers to keep Ingram? Trade him to another team? Don't sign him to a max now? How can you operate a franchise constantly afraid to sign players long term?

And how do you know they don't need assets in 2024 when you don't even know what those will be yet? If things don't turn out with Ingram or Zion somehow by then, are those 2024, 2025, 2026 assets still useless?

I thought at least the draft capital king would be pleased as punch.

[Pelicanidae]

I think Wiseman to the GS Warriors is huge. When a big can play in today's space and pace game that gives them a huge advantage. Wiseman has the physical tools to be on the court during important mins even on a team like GS that traditionally likes to go small in those situations. IMO James is a game changer for GS. If he actually can extend his range to the 3pt line it will be scary for the league.

Well yeah, if he suddenly gains several very important skills he has never shown before he will be much better. That's true for basically everyone. If Kira Lewis suddenly learns to shoot 70% at the rim he'll be the best player in the class.

[Wowowowow]

So you don't think Ingram is here on a max contract in the next few days? That's the problem with the deal that brought us Ingram. The min any player that is considered part of the core is off their rookie deal that team is on the clock to be winners sooner rather than later. We need if not proven ballers atleast guys with promise. What we don't need are assets in the 2024 draft. Now obviously those assets can be traded, but when you trade for a guy that'll be a restricted free agent you have to understand you speed up your rebuild more than trading for rookies and future draft picks.

Yep. This is the current fear behind the curtain I have.

Brandon Ingram is about to sign a max deal, most improved player, putting up “only 1 of” stats at the age of 22 and hinting on social media with subliminal messages that he’s the new TMac Iverson.

...and, not finished...

Zion statistically may have just had the best rookie season of all time at 19. Beat out all your favs fg% in his rookie year and actually has the fgm above 9 in 27-28 mpg to make you curious to ask “just how good was he?”

...and we are talking about some slow molasses build up to 2024. Shaq drafted in 1992 but Magic fans talking about some 1997. Cat was a Laker by then.

There’s a few of us here who may see it but I think we have a window right now and I hate feeling like someone is tempering that because they are scared to truly bet on the players on the floor right now...but hoping we hold their hand to see the same players break champagne glass in 4-5 years after this “mastermind” process. I’m not buying it.

Hold the league up to the light and you might actually see we have Zion and BI. I believe there’s a window right now and we just need vet winners and not 13 game losing streaking quiet as a mouse vet losers.

[fullcourtpress]

I actually liked the Bucks' picks as far as 2nd rounders go


sam merril
jordan nwora

[Pelicanidae]

I love how we had Dell with his instruction to win now ,trading everything to try and get vets, and everyone hated it.

The moment we have a guy in charge taking it more slowly, half the board is angry at him for not rushing it.

[DarkHornet]

I love how we had Dell with his instruction to win now ,trading everything to try and get vets, and everyone hated it.

The moment we have a guy in charge taking it more slowly, half the board is angry at him for not rushing it.

Lesson: You can't please everyone. In some cases, certain people will never be pleased.

[PELICANSFAN]

I can't give you a name because I didn't watch enough college basketball last season. But from what I saw the Pels I can say we needed a big and a bigger wing defender.

So how can you say we "lost" when you cannot even name a player that would have helped the team that we should have picked. With no summer league and a different GLeague, is it worth just picking a player to say we picked one?

[Wowowowow]

I love how we had Dell with his instruction to win now ,trading everything to try and get vets, and everyone hated it.

The moment we have a guy in charge taking it more slowly, half the board is angry at him for not rushing it.

And that’s the main issue I have.

Using an algorithm philosophy to build a team when your own unique personnel/assets should always determine how you move.

[jawznola]

I personally think the Pels front office simply weren’t high on the talent in this draft, and rather than to make picks, they opted to trade them off for future more talented drafts. Additionally, this team lacks valuable veterans who can be assets to the young talent. I think we’re focused on acquiring skilled veterans at this point. Maybe a few 2 year deals here and there.

[MichaelMcNamara]

I personally think the Pels front office simply weren’t high on the talent in this draft, and rather than to make picks, they opted to trade them off for future more talented drafts. Additionally, this team lacks valuable veterans who can be assets to the young talent. I think we’re focused on acquiring skilled veterans at this point. Maybe a few 2 year deals here and there.

Talent wasnt the issue. I think they thought the talent was just fine. Its the circumstances of this year that made rookies unappealing. First of all, most of these guys havent played real games in 9 months. In a regular year, many would have played in March. Played highly competitive pick up leading up to draft, then Summer League, then camp a month or two later. This year, 9 months off before they get to training camp and then camp is only 10 days before preseason games start and then teams probably have fewer practices than any season since the 50 game season

So....you are gonna see a bunch of rusty guys who didnt have fundamentals any way and you will have no time with them in camp or in season to develop them. Why grab a bunch of guys in that circumstance?

[Pels4Life]

To be fair considering the current situation kicking the can down the road a year or so to "normal" times is a solid strategy. Also, we need a little more time to develop our team. We have so many new parts it will take atleast a season to get just the coaching scheme/playstyle in order for the vets. We have a little time...not a ton...but the strategy imployed is debatable but solid nonetheless.

[JJackisangry]

I love how we had Dell with his instruction to win now ,trading everything to try and get vets, and everyone hated it.

The moment we have a guy in charge taking it more slowly, half the board is angry at him for not rushing it.

Yep. While it is premature to say we won this draft, I think we are making the right play by setting ourselves up for the future. Hell, if you keep Hill and Bledsoe, you have a pretty decent damn roster for this season (not that I think we keep them). It would be hard for me to say we lost this draft as we are looking for a normal rebuild rather than the rushed rebuild.

[Pels4Life]

The only downside I can see is I will need to save away a little more every month for playoff tickets.

[da ThRONe]

Well yeah, if he suddenly gains several very important skills he has never shown before he will be much better. That's true for basically everyone. If Kira Lewis suddenly learns to shoot 70% at the rim he'll be the best player in the class.

He's a big that already has a decent mid range so getting out to the 3pt line isn't some huge stretch. And again that's not even why I think he adds value to GS. They have size and rim protection without out having to give up much in perimeter defense. If all he does for the next few year is defend the hoop and posr, rim run, and finish at the basket that's make the Warriors more dangerous.

[luckyman]

To be fair considering the current situation kicking the can down the road a year or so to "normal" times is a solid strategy. Also, we need a little more time to develop our team. We have so many new parts it will take atleast a season to get just the coaching scheme/playstyle in order for the vets. We have a little time...not a ton...but the strategy imployed is debatable but solid nonetheless.

Thats the other thing. Whole new coaching staff. Won't have much time for rookies to learn at base camp at all. Langdon even said the G-league might be structured differently.

[pelafanatic]

He's a big that already has a decent mid range so getting out to the 3pt line isn't some huge stretch. And again that's not even why I think he adds value to GS. They have size and rim protection without out having to give up much and perimeter defense. If all he does for the next few year is defend the hoop and posr, rim run, and finish at the basket that's make the Warriors more dangerous.

Wouldn't playing him in crunch time as a rim protector diminish Draymond's value though, thereby making them a worse team as a whole? If you're playing two bigs that can't shoot, and now likely without Klay, along with Wiggins who still doesnt have a reliable shot, that's not much room for Steph to work.

[da ThRONe]

So what in the world should they have done then? Told the Lakers to keep Ingram? Trade him to another team? Don't sign him to a max now? How can you operate a franchise constantly afraid to sign players long term?

And how do you know they don't need assets in 2024 when you don't even know what those will be yet? If things don't turn out with Ingram or Zion somehow by then, are those 2024, 2025, 2026 assets still useless?

I thought at least the draft capital king would be pleased as punch.

I don't hate gaining draft capital. But it's a delicate situation that need to be timed right. We have a gang of future assets to the point were we could see some go to waste if they end up as late 1st. If we are going to pull all our assets together to go and overwhelm some team when they star comes available great. But at some point the assets need to line up with the young players already on the roster or we are back to square one. If Griff turns all these picks into Devin Booker or Karl Anthony Townes 2 or 3 years from now I will tip my hat to him. There's nothing in his resume that says he's capable but we'll see, and I'll be here to admit I was wrong(hopefully).

[pelafanatic]

Hold the league up to the light and you might actually see we have Zion and BI. I believe there’s a window right now and we just need vet winners and not 13 game losing streaking quiet as a mouse vet losers.

Dude free agency hasn't even started yet, and we already have JJ and Josh Hart on the roster. We'll more than likely have one of Bledsoe or Hill as well.

If you don't want to see a 13 game losing streak then you should be happy we didn't draft 4 rookies.

[da ThRONe]

Wouldn't playing him in crunch time as a rim protector diminish Draymond's value though, thereby making them a worse team as a whole? If you're playing two bigs that can't shoot, and now likely without Klay, along with Wiggins who still doesnt have a reliable shot, that's not much room for Steph to work.

1st and foremost if Klay is done for the season so are the Warriors. And there are more ways to win than taking 3's. I think the added defense gives them a greater chance to win and that assuming Wiseman who's a pretty skilled player gives them nothing offensively.

[pelafanatic]

1st and foremost if Klay is done for the season so are the Warriors. And there are more ways to win than taking 3's. I think the added defense gives them a greater chance to win and that assuming Wiseman who's a pretty skilled player gives them nothing offensively.

This is getting away from the thread, but if that's the plan for Wiseman, they should move Draymond as soon as possible.

And to your other point about Griffin being "capable" to swing a deal for a star, Griffin made the move for Love while in Cleveland. I'm fine with criticism but you're being negative for the sake of it.

[da ThRONe]

This is getting away from the thread, but if that's the plan for Wiseman, they should move Draymond as soon as possible.

And to your other point about Griffin being "capable" to swing a deal for a star, Griffin made the move for Love while in Cleveland. I'm fine with criticism but you're being negative for the sake of it.

He turned the 1st overall pick that year and the year before into Kevin Love. He didn't turn a bunch of future 1st into an All star. I hope you see the difference.

Why would GS trade Green because Wiseman is a prototypical 5 in today's NBA? Green is so underrated especially with the Warriors. The offense runs through Green and there's no limit on the amount of quality defenders a team can have. Having two great defenders at the 4 and 5 is a plus not a negative especially if Thompson is available and "right".

[pelafanatic]

He turned the 1st overall pick that year and the year before into Kevin Love. He didn't turn a bunch of future 1st into an All star. I hope you see the difference.

Why would GS trade Green because Wiseman is a prototypical 5 in today's NBA? Green is so underrated especially with the Warriors. The offense runs through Green and there's no limit on the amount of quality defenders a team can have. Having two great defenders at the 4 and 5 is a plus not a negative especially if Thompson is available and "right".

You're not trading only the future firsts for an all star. That's why it's so important to develop the youth that we have on the team and not add more. We need one of Hayes, NAW, Lonzo, etc to become a Levert or Brandon Ingram level tradeable asset. That, to go along with the 100 future firsts, would then be enough to trade for a star. This is a linear process. We need to have patience and hope our developmental team does the job.

Where we're staring, though, with the core of Zion and BI, is lightyears ahead of where most teams are in this process. The Thunder are about to have to max SGA and still don't have that second star. The Grizzlies are going to have to max JJJ, who hasn't given me any reason to believe he's a number 2 on a championship caliber team.

Now, imagining if Kira can reach his full potential or somewhere close to it. You have a core of Kira, BI, Zion with a war chest of assets, as well as glue guys like Hart. That's exciting as hell.