2017 NBA Draft Lottery

[dragickingdom]

I could see pairs of the Big Ballers shoes being copied in China and flooding the market with knockoffs. Without the legal team of one of the big shoe companies, they won't be able to do anything about it.

[ShelC]

Don't feel bad Split. I went back and edited my response

I think Tatum is in the 4-6 range, maybe 7 but it's still early. Fox, Isaac, maybe Monk depending on the order.

I'm really not that big a fan of Warren. I think he's a fine scorer, but I'm not passing on a SF I like just because he's on the team. He may need to be a scorer off the bench, or because of his ability to move/score off the ball, he might be attractive to a team like the Knicks.

[Split T]

If we're at two and either Ball or Fultz are on the board, you take them and figure it out later. The best part is that we have Booker, who I think could play next to either guy. The issue(s) would be moving Knight and/or Bledsoe.

At 3, you probably have to take him. I love Fox but not sure I'd take him and then have to move Bledsoe and Knight. I like Tatum a lot but not sure I'd take him as high as 3. Might look to trade back if I think Tatum is the better player.

I somehow missed the 2nd paragraph. That seems pretty reasonable. I think Tatum is going to be a good player, I'm not sure how he fits with Warren here though. I think I'd take Isaac, fox, Ntilikina, and monk over him.

You cant draft that way unless you have all those guys rated higher IMO. BPA is mandatory at this stage of rebuilding, I like Warren, but not enough to pass on Tatum. Monk? Really? A small 2? Too much Knight there for my liking.

I don't know that I have them higher than Tatum, they are all pretty close to me. I think their are 3 tiers to the draft. Tier 1 is Fultz, tier 2 is ball and Jackson, tier 3 is fox, Tatum, Isaac, monk, and Ntilikina. I prefer the other 4 to Tatum, but I wouldn't be upset taking him as long as we don't take him over ball, Jackson and Fultz.

As for monk, I think he'll be a pretty special offensive player. He's probably one of the top 2 or 3 shooters in the draft and that's an area where we need a lot of help. You say knight, but what if he's CJ McCollum?

[Split T]

Don't feel bad Split. I went back and edited my response

I think Tatum is in the 4-6 range, maybe 7 but it's still early. Fox, Isaac, maybe Monk depending on the order.

I'm really not that big a fan of Warren. I think he's a fine scorer, but I'm not passing on a SF I like just because he's on the team. He may need to be a scorer off the bench, or because of his ability to move/score off the ball, he might be attractive to a team like the Knicks.

I'm not a huge Warren fan either. I'd have no problem moving on from him if we add Tatum. I just think some of the other prospects (fox, Isaac, monk) are just as good of prospects and provide more unique skills than Tatum.

[3rdside]

Whose life would you bet?

Cubby - he'll do (I keed i keed). Seem to recall that was one of his calling cards!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bruiser]

I'm a little worried that the report that we prefer ball is true. Makes me kinda hope LA lands #1 and takes Ball. That way we have to pick Fultz. That being said, I'm not opposed to Ball the player, just think passing on Fultz would be a big mistake.

If we manage to land the 1st pick we have to draft Fultz.
It would really break my heart if we don't.
1st is usually pretty easy to pick.
The 2-5 range not so much.
IMHO

[Bruiser]

It's just the headache and potential distractions though. That kind of stuff can eat away at a team and its chemistry. I know I'm sounding a bit dramatic but I'd rather just avoid all of that. Even getting assets back in a trade isn't the same as getting a great player who wants to be on your team. If Booker wanted out and we got some good assets for him, would it be the same as having a 20 yr old Booker who's just scratching the surface?

I do not watch much College Ball but I am getting a semi-weird feeling about this LavOnzo-Ball-Show. He might be the best player at #2 right now but on the other hand we are not exactly the Spurs in terms of managing talent in fiddly situations. It is just that I am enjoying our new high character and drama-free way of running this franchise so much that I would tend to shy away from taking the risk but maybe we shouldn't.

I feel that the top of this draft class is really tough to figure out but am hoping that MCD is working his butt off to reach a conclusive decision come draft day ...

[3rdside]

So agreed on Jackson. Iguodala, on the basis of your measurements, probably qualifies as having excess wing span, leaving George as the only 1st teamer, so they're mainly very good, rather than great, defenders

I mostly included Iggy because his total length is about equal to Jackson. I think where Jackson might struggle, or at least not be as good, is in defending 4's.

Anyone know what kind of wingspan Marion had?

Can't find it either...It's at least 7ft vs 6'7" height but my guess is 7'2".

[TOO]

If we're at two and either Ball or Fultz are on the board, you take them and figure it out later. The best part is that we have Booker, who I think could play next to either guy. The issue(s) would be moving Knight and/or Bledsoe.

At 3, you probably have to take him. I love Fox but not sure I'd take him and then have to move Bledsoe and Knight. I like Tatum a lot but not sure I'd take him as high as 3. Might look to trade back if I think Tatum is the better player.

I somehow missed the 2nd paragraph. That seems pretty reasonable. I think Tatum is going to be a good player, I'm not sure how he fits with Warren here though. I think I'd take Isaac, fox, Ntilikina, and monk over him.

You cant draft that way unless you have all those guys rated higher IMO. BPA is mandatory at this stage of rebuilding, I like Warren, but not enough to pass on Tatum. Monk? Really? A small 2? Too much Knight there for my liking.

I don't know that I have them higher than Tatum, they are all pretty close to me. I think their are 3 tiers to the draft. Tier 1 is Fultz, tier 2 is ball and Jackson, tier 3 is fox, Tatum, Isaac, monk, and Ntilikina. I prefer the other 4 to Tatum, but I wouldn't be upset taking him as long as we don't take him over ball, Jackson and Fultz.

As for monk, I think he'll be a pretty special offensive player. He's probably one of the top 2 or 3 shooters in the draft and that's an area where we need a lot of help. You say knight, but what if he's CJ McCollum?

I'm not a McCollum fan so... Probably not the best person to ask. Too much of a turnstyle defensively. We have enough of those already.

[Pips]

For me Monk=Oladipo.

[In2ition]

For me Monk=Oladipo.

Really? Why do you say that?

[carey]

For me Monk=Oladipo.

Really? Why do you say that?

I don't know about this one either other than maybe Monk is a guy caught between a 1 and a 2 and so was Oladipo a bit. 'Dipo was a 3 year player at Indiana that had to improve his shooting before he could declare. Monk is already quite the shooter (50% from 2 and 40% from 3 as a 19-year old freshman) and has none of the defensive chops that 'Dipo has.

[Split T]

I like to look at prospects and and categorize their skills into 3 categories: What do I know they can do, what do I think they can do, and what can't they do.

I know monk can shoot and shoot from about anywhere, of the dribble or spot up. I also know he's a great athlete.

I think he'll be able to get to the rim and finish.

As of now, he can't run an offense.

Defensively, I'm not really sure. I think he'll be passable, but might struggle with bigger 2 guards.

[ShelC]

He'll be a classic combo scoring guard IMO and unless he's a transcendent talent, he'll end up a Jason Terry, Ben Gordon, Lou Williams type. Actually reminds me a bit of Quincy Douby. Dipo was always more of a power swing IMO who had to work to become a decent all around player. Monk is a natural scorer but doesn't have the size or physicality of Dipo.

[Split T]

Lou could be a good comp. As is early in his career Ben Gordon. C.J mccollum is a best case scenario.

[carey]

Lou could be a good comp. As is early in his career Ben Gordon. C.J mccollum is a best case scenario.

CJ was the best shooter off the dribble in several drafts when he came out. I'm not sure anyone in this draft is that class of shooter.

[In2ition]

Lou could be a good comp. As is early in his career Ben Gordon. C.J mccollum is a best case scenario.

CJ was the best shooter off the dribble in several drafts when he came out. I'm not sure anyone in this draft is that class of shooter.

Monk is fantastic, probably not in McCullom's class though. Much better athlete and phenomenal in his own right as a shooter though. My closest comparison to CJ in this draft would be Kennard.

[Pips]

Monk is a guy caught between a 1 and a 2 and so was Oladipo a bit.

This.

[In2ition]

Monk is a guy caught between a 1 and a 2 and so was Oladipo a bit.

This.

I always thought of Oladipo as between a 2-3. He isn't really skilled enough as a shooter to be a great 2, and I just don't see him as a 1 at all. I don't know if Monk has the pg skills, but he is a heck of a shooter and scorer, which is much better than Oladipo.

[In2ition]

This place is dead. I can't wait until the lottery happens and then we will have a better idea who will be available for the Suns pick and what could possibly happen. Right now, all this conjecture is killing me. The longer it's taking for the draft the less I'm enamored with the top 3 and becoming more intrigued with some of the lower players.