Re: NBA DRAFT 2019 THREAD
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:40 am
I had to take a shower, I felt like my brain was abused
I had to take a shower, I felt like my brain was abused
Being 6’9” and a high volume and efficienct 3 pt shooter is one of the only skills you need when you have no other skills. Cam would have been gone by 20 with Philly. If that’s Jones’s guy, that’s his guy. I dont know who else he could have took at 11 that he could have traded back for Cam and made a profit. This draft sucked for other teams too. Even Clarke fell way back.Ring_Wanted wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:13 amMaybe Dylan Windler, who went #26 to CLE. Doesn't come with the plus of 'high release' that Can has, or his alleged potential to play PF, but health is not questionable.Drewsprocket wrote: ↑Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:09 pmWas there a better shooter available past 11? Definitely a better candidate. Brandon Clarke didn’t seem that impressive. It definitely sucks to lack confidence im our draft. It’s pretty clear the FO has such a reputation of making bad moves that they los leverage even when they have a docent chip (Warren).ShelC wrote: ↑Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:23 amThe scouting stuff is concerning and I heard the pod where they went off about our draft prep, or lack thereof, and only scouting one conference, maybe not doing homework on guys they should've been looking at. But along with scouting players also comes gathering info on other teams, who they're interested in, knowing player projections. I think taking Johnson at 11 showed a serious lack of knowledge of all the prospects and where they were slotted to go. I'm all about "take your guy if he's there" but this was a clear reach. And really, anyone who knows the draft knows that Jrs and Srs and older players typically go mid-late first round and 2nd round. If wanted older, more polished players, we could've traded back again into the 20s and taken Cam and TyJerome just the same. Clarke too. That's not "hindsight is 20/20", that's knowing the draft.
People were all over the place. It’s a valid point to some extent but I’m not emotionally invested in this draft. Cam looks like a top shooter in this draft altogether and Jones took him 6-9 picks sooner in a shite draft class. Saric is a good player languishing in a bad fit. We at least got as sure thing out of the lottery since we dropped to six.Marty [Mori Chu] wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:38 amDefending drafting Cam at #11 is like defending buying a hot dog for lunch for $20. We get it, you had a craving for a hot dog; that was what you really wanted for lunch. But you should have found a way to get it for less than $20, or at least should have gotten a really nice combo meal for your $20 in the process.
To wit:Marty [Mori Chu] wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:38 amDefending drafting Cam at #11 is like defending buying a hot dog for lunch for $20. We get it, you had a craving for a hot dog; that was what you really wanted for lunch. But you should have found a way to get it for less than $20, or at least should have gotten a really nice combo meal for your $20 in the process.
https://twitter.com/TheMattPetersen/status/1143280060230787074
Who's to say that another team in the 15-30 range was willing to give up an asset to trade up to 11? Could've the FO had some indication that another team was targeting Cam Johnson and thus risking the guy they wanted because they had to pick up another asset?specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:39 amYep. There's really no logic to defend it. Even if Cam is your guy, no excuse not to move back and pick up another asset.
That's a very nice analogy; thumbs upMarty [Mori Chu] wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:38 amDefending drafting Cam at #11 is like defending buying a hot dog for lunch for $20. We get it, you had a craving for a hot dog; that was what you really wanted for lunch. But you should have found a way to get it for less than $20, or at least should have gotten a really nice combo meal for your $20 in the process.
Flagrant Fowl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:46 amWho's to say that another team in the 15-30 range was willing to give up an asset to trade up to 11? Could've the FO had some indication that another team was targeting Cam Johnson and thus risking the guy they wanted because they had to pick up another asset?specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:39 amYep. There's really no logic to defend it. Even if Cam is your guy, no excuse not to move back and pick up another asset.
Not to pick on you, but I'm already tired of these kinds of statements and the guy hasn't even played a game. As if it's just as simple as calling a team and demanding something from them in order to help your own cause.
Cam’s new nickname: Vanilla Hot DogBucktastic365 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:12 amThat's a very nice analogy; thumbs upMarty [Mori Chu] wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:38 amDefending drafting Cam at #11 is like defending buying a hot dog for lunch for $20. We get it, you had a craving for a hot dog; that was what you really wanted for lunch. But you should have found a way to get it for less than $20, or at least should have gotten a really nice combo meal for your $20 in the process.
Cam was a VERY vanilla choice; my hope is that he is GOURMET vanilla.
Okay Jeff, you can come out from your burner account nowFlagrant Fowl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:46 amWho's to say that another team in the 15-30 range was willing to give up an asset to trade up to 11? Could've the FO had some indication that another team was targeting Cam Johnson and thus risking the guy they wanted because they had to pick up another asset?specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:39 amYep. There's really no logic to defend it. Even if Cam is your guy, no excuse not to move back and pick up another asset.
Not to pick on you, but I'm already tired of these kinds of statements and the guy hasn't even played a game. As if it's just as simple as calling a team and demanding something from them in order to help your own cause.
Find a new slant.specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:27 pmOkay Jeff, you can come out from your burner account nowFlagrant Fowl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:46 amWho's to say that another team in the 15-30 range was willing to give up an asset to trade up to 11? Could've the FO had some indication that another team was targeting Cam Johnson and thus risking the guy they wanted because they had to pick up another asset?specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:39 amYep. There's really no logic to defend it. Even if Cam is your guy, no excuse not to move back and pick up another asset.
Not to pick on you, but I'm already tired of these kinds of statements and the guy hasn't even played a game. As if it's just as simple as calling a team and demanding something from them in order to help your own cause.
That's exactly what Jeff Bower would say.Flagrant Fowl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:34 pmFind a new slant.specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:27 pmOkay Jeff, you can come out from your burner account nowFlagrant Fowl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:46 amWho's to say that another team in the 15-30 range was willing to give up an asset to trade up to 11? Could've the FO had some indication that another team was targeting Cam Johnson and thus risking the guy they wanted because they had to pick up another asset?specialsauce wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:39 amYep. There's really no logic to defend it. Even if Cam is your guy, no excuse not to move back and pick up another asset.
Not to pick on you, but I'm already tired of these kinds of statements and the guy hasn't even played a game. As if it's just as simple as calling a team and demanding something from them in order to help your own cause.