.
Pelicans Report
 
Page 51 of 59 FirstFirst ... 41 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 ... LastLast
Results 1,251 to 1,275 of 1466

Thread: 2022 NBA Draft Lottery

  1. #1251
    So Griffin was terrible in workouts eh

  2. #1252
    Quote Originally Posted by PelicanProf View Post
    I think you have to factor in the team for which a player goes to. We have mentioned that our roster will not support a lot of extra minutes so I believe you are drafting for fit and what truly enhances your team. We are lucky to be in this position in my opinion as other teams need to take a swing/miss approach. I just feel that Griffin will look for a solid fit guy that helps our core win more games (that might be better locker room guys, practice guys and just flat out hustle and D guys).
    We?ve also mentioned player progression in relation to what our team looks like in the upcoming years. If David is the type of player that needs the ball in his hands, then his growth would be stymied by all the high usage players

  3. #1253
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    Ingram, funnily enough, has always been a better C&S guy than an off-the-dribble guy from behind the arc. I know that last year he had a down year, but it's reasonable to assume that he'll bounce back and with Zion (presumably) healthy and therefore playing some possessions with the ball in his hands, BI can be considered another floor spacer and shooter in certain contexts.

    CJ also exists, and Herb has shown he can knock down a decent percentage of his open 3s. JV is also a reasonable shooter for a big.
    CJ, Trey, and BI being your main shooters is almost enough for a deep run. Trey still hasn't been able to create his own shot. I personally think we do need one more guy that can burn from perimeter. We get that 3rd legit shooter to develop that can also create his own shot. Team ceiling is limitless.

  4. #1254
    Quote Originally Posted by Taker597 View Post
    CJ, Trey, and BI being your main shooters is almost enough for a deep run. Trey still hasn't been able to create his own shot. I personally think we do need one more guy that can burn from perimeter. We get that 3rd legit shooter to develop that can also create his own shot. Team ceiling is limitless.
    Do you really need that much shooting when you also have Zion Williamson though?

  5. #1255
    Quote Originally Posted by Taker597 View Post
    CJ, Trey, and BI being your main shooters is almost enough for a deep run. Trey still hasn't been able to create his own shot. I personally think we do need one more guy that can burn from perimeter. We get that 3rd legit shooter to develop that can also create his own shot. Team ceiling is limitless.
    Which was my whole point with Cam Johnson, but seems like that was just a legless rumor. I'd still do Cam Johnson and a 2026 first for 8 if Cam agreed to 4/60 prior to the trade

  6. #1256
    Quote Originally Posted by coreylaron View Post
    We?ve also mentioned player progression in relation to what our team looks like in the upcoming years. If David is the type of player that needs the ball in his hands, then his growth would be stymied by all the high usage players
    You don't necessarily draft to what your team will look like in the future (you never know what that might be). Drafting for what the team will look like in the future is just one piece to the equation for drafting. We will all see tomorrow what they do. I just personally have a hard time believing they will draft a boom/bust type of guy.

  7. #1257
    Quote Originally Posted by PelicanProf View Post
    You don't necessarily draft to what your team will look like in the future (you never know what that might be). Drafting for what the team will look like in the future is just one piece to the equation for drafting. We will all see tomorrow what they do. I just personally have a hard time believing they will draft a boom/bust type of guy.
    I think they've kind of done it twice with Jax and Kira. I'm not sure that's enough evidence to make a trend, but their two lottery picks outside of Zion so far have been boom or bust types in theory (even though neither has boomed or busted in actuality)

  8. #1258
    Quote Originally Posted by PelicanProf View Post
    You don't necessarily draft to what your team will look like in the future (you never know what that might be). Drafting for what the team will look like in the future is just one piece to the equation for drafting. We will all see tomorrow what they do. I just personally have a hard time believing they will draft a boom/bust type of guy.
    It depends on what you’re definition of boom or bust is. To me, literally every player is boom or bust, so you go for could have the highest boom with your team. That’s just how I would do it though. Especially for a team that doesn’t have the minutes for a rookie

  9. #1259
    Quote Originally Posted by pelafanatic View Post
    I think they've kind of done it twice with Jax and Kira. I'm not sure that's enough evidence to make a trend, but their two lottery picks outside of Zion so far have been boom or bust types in theory (even though neither has boomed or busted in actuality)
    There’s no such thing as safety in a draft though. No one knows for sure what any of them will do.

  10. #1260
    Quote Originally Posted by coreylaron View Post
    There’s no such thing as safety in a draft though. No one knows for sure what any of them will do.
    Yea I'm not saying there is. Just presenting the evidence we have for the argument

  11. #1261
    Quote Originally Posted by pelafanatic View Post
    I think they've kind of done it twice with Jax and Kira. I'm not sure that's enough evidence to make a trend, but their two lottery picks outside of Zion so far have been boom or bust types in theory (even though neither has boomed or busted in actuality)
    I completely agree. I think at the time they were drafted we had a different team and you needed to take those chances. I don't think they do it this time around based on the current team make-up but I could wrong for sure!

  12. #1262
    Quote Originally Posted by pelafanatic View Post
    Yea I'm not saying there is. Just presenting the evidence we have for the argument
    I getcha

  13. #1263
    Quote Originally Posted by coreylaron View Post
    There’s no such thing as safety in a draft though. No one knows for sure what any of them will do.
    You are correct (at every professional sport level). You are just hedging your bets on the data and information you have as to who is a safer play (not necessarily drafting on what you project their potential can be but rather what they bring to the table today).

  14. #1264
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara View Post
    And yet when the games really mattered, Graham got less and less minutes. And again, you gotta steal 30 minutes for Zion.

    Show me your 240. Just do the exercise and watch how many better players you have to steal from to give Graham minutes
    I know you've done the breakdown somewhere before, but just for interest sake, here's what I got using rough estimates:

    JV-30
    Zion-30
    Ingram-30
    Herb-30
    CJ-30
    -------------
    ~ 150 minutes for starting 5

    240 available roster minutes
    -150 starter minutes:
    ----------------------
    ~ 90 minutes left for bench:

    Jose-20
    Nance-20
    Trey-20

    These 3 key bench players expect to have a secure/expanded bench role next season.

    90 overall bench minutes
    - 60 Jose/Nance/Trey minutes
    ----------------------
    ~ 30 bench minutes remaining for:

    Hayes
    Graham
    Kira
    draft pick(s)
    Naji

    Temple(?)...

  15. #1265
    Yeah I get what y’all saying, to me it just makes sense to swing big in theory if you already have a good team and in all likelihood won’t be drafting high if at all anymore. My brain says Dyson is the guy. In the back of my head though I can’t help but think about Sharpe lol. I’m extremely happy with Dyson, but if he and Mathurin are gone and we draft sharpe, I have a sheepish grin on my face. Unlikely scenario though

  16. #1266
    I think we're going to see a drop in JV's minutes because I don't think he finishes as many games with Nance and Zion in the fold. 30 seems super high

  17. #1267
    Quote Originally Posted by coreylaron View Post
    Yeah I get what y’all saying, to me it just makes sense to swing big in theory if you already have a good team and in all likelihood won’t be drafting high if at all anymore. My brain says Dyson is the guy. In the back of my head though I can’t help but think about Sharpe lol. I’m extremely happy with Dyson, but if he and Mathurin are gone and we draft sharpe, I have a sheepish grin on my face. Unlikely scenario though
    These are 3 90th percentile measurements guys with very good athleticism. They all have super high upside. I trust Willie and the gang to develop any one of them

  18. #1268
    Quote Originally Posted by PelicanProf View Post
    You are correct (at every professional sport level). You are just hedging your bets on the data and information you have as to who is a safer play (not necessarily drafting on what you project their potential can be but rather what they bring to the table today).
    Don’t you want to try to get guy with the highest “potential” though. Instead of thinking of the floor?

  19. #1269
    Quote Originally Posted by pelafanatic View Post
    I think we're going to see a drop in JV's minutes because I don't think he finishes as many games with Nance and Zion in the fold. 30 seems super high
    I think 30 is high for JV, low for everyone else

  20. #1270
    Quote Originally Posted by coreylaron View Post
    Don’t you want to try to get guy with the highest “potential” though. Instead of thinking of the floor?
    It just depends on how you want to build a team. I believe in our core and don't feel we need to take a chance. I would rather build around them and see what we can do. It is just my approach and everyone would do this differently. If we were drafting in the top 4, without a doubt draft one of the top 4 and figure out how to make it all work. Being that we are at 8 I just believe we have the core to win if we can surround them with the "right guys". Figuring out the "right guys" is the challenge of course and that is where I trust our coaches to figure that out. I am just giving my opinion of what I would do.

  21. #1271
    Quote Originally Posted by PelicanProf View Post
    It just depends on how you want to build a team. I believe in our core and don't feel we need to take a chance. I would rather build around them and see what we can do. It is just my approach and everyone would do this differently. If we were drafting in the top 4, without a doubt draft one of the top 4 and figure out how to make it all work. Being that we are at 8 I just believe we have the core to win if we can surround them with the "right guys". Figuring out the "right guys" is the challenge of course and that is where I trust our coaches to figure that out. I am just giving my opinion of what I would do.
    I feel ya

  22. #1272
    Charter Member PELICANSFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    22,698
    I can see Daniels being a good fit mainly because, as Mac has said, he does a lot of other things when not scoring. For some reason though, I really like Mathurin. So, I would be happy with either. If both are gone, I still lean towards taking the homerun shot on Sharpe and seeing what he becomes.

  23. #1273
    Quote Originally Posted by PelicanProf View Post
    It just depends on how you want to build a team. I believe in our core and don't feel we need to take a chance. I would rather build around them and see what we can do. It is just my approach and everyone would do this differently. If we were drafting in the top 4, without a doubt draft one of the top 4 and figure out how to make it all work. Being that we are at 8 I just believe we have the core to win if we can surround them with the "right guys". Figuring out the "right guys" is the challenge of course and that is where I trust our coaches to figure that out. I am just giving my opinion of what I would do.
    The thing for me is everyone is saying "trade DG so we can use the full MLE". If we're so confident that we, the New Orleans Pelicans, can recruit a player on the MLE who is actually worth that money, then we should absolutely be drafting a super high ceiling player. If you think you can get off DG and go sign Gary Harris for the MLE, you would be a fool to pass on Sharpe at 8

  24. #1274
    Quote Originally Posted by pelafanatic View Post
    The thing for me is everyone is saying "trade DG so we can use the full MLE". If we're so confident that we, the New Orleans Pelicans, can recruit a player on the MLE who is actually worth that money, then we should absolutely be drafting a super high ceiling player. If you think you can get off DG and go sign Gary Harris for the MLE, you would be a fool to pass on Sharpe at 8
    I can see what you are saying but same logic can apply to a draft pick. Hence AD - you may only keep them a few years if they really want to leave. I feel players will want to start coming to NOLA now that we are winning. If we start our the season stinking it up again then no one is coming. Winning cures a lot of disdain for other factors.

  25. #1275
    Quote Originally Posted by coreylaron View Post
    You don?t draft in the lottery for depth though. Also with our current roster, generating offense isn?t going to be our issue.
    That seems like a silly overexageration. The second half of the lottery of a fairly weak draft? You try to get something to help your team. If you have a team that you think can win now, and there is a guy out there that can help fill an immediate need, even if that need is shooting depth. And the guy has a decently high ceiling for future growth, I think you take him.

    That's why I think Mathurin makes a better pick than Dyson. He fills an immediate need, and is a good enough athlete to allow for continued growth. So what is the main issue for the team? Is it three point defense. Then you go Dyson, because he fills an immediate need on that end. Is it three point offense? Then you go Mathurin.

    Our problem was that we were 24th in the league in three point offense. If we want to make a push I think that number has to improve. Bringing in a guard that shoots poorly, and don't kid yourself, he shot very poorly especially for a guard, with the hope that you can turn that into a strength with coaching might be a tad too optimistic.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •