2019 NBA Draft Thread

[Shabazz]

Draftniks - What makes Brandon Clarke much better as a prospect than Jordan Bell was?

I'm not really a Draftnik, but I've been advocating for Clarke. Here's my take.

• I do think Clarke is a role player similar to Bell. Not a star.
• Bell is playing in the NBA Finals, so most guys would consider that a pretty successful career.
• Clarke's blocks are on another level from Bell. Bell was a good shotblocker, but Clarke is something else.
• The advanced stats are crazy for Clarke (for what that's worth). Clarke may turn out to be the statistical anomaly, but Gonzaga was historically better with him on the court than they were without him.
• That's because his energy and IQ were so central to everything Gonzaga did on both ends of the court. He was college's Ben Wallace.
• I don't think he will be the NBA's Ben Wallace, but I do think he has the energy/personality to elevate his teammates and the IQ to be in the right place at the right time.

Thanks.

Bell is starting for a finals team, but also looks like he's a year away from being out of the NBA.

After all the hand-wringing about the Bulls selling the pick, he's been awful this year.

[In2ition]

Draftniks - What makes Brandon Clarke much better as a prospect than Jordan Bell was?

This is a good question, because they are a lot alike. I was a big advocate for Bell with the 2nd round pick 2 years ago and Clarke does a lot of the things that Bell did, just better at everything.

• He's a rich man's version of Bell. All his advanced stats were better.

• He's not as long as Bell, but he's quicker and bouncier.

• Clarke's switchability is better than Bell onto guards.

• I also think his defensive instincts and execution are just a little better than Bell's were.

• I also get the feeling that Clarke has a better head on his shoulders and is a little more of a leader type than Bell.

[specialsauce]

No to
Anybody that can’t shoot. Just NO.

[Mori Chu]

I just hope we don't draft an "athletic" swing who cannot shoot. I've seen enough of those guys to last a lifetime. Low ceiling.

[INFORMER]

These guys rank 70, 74, 79 and then 3 unranked.

Not exactly a big day of prospects

Ky Bowman is interesting due to his rebounding and ability to hit a high volume of 3s.

[Mori Chu]

This workouts are a bunch of no-names. Why aren't we working out anybody who will be in the range of the #6 pick?

[Ring_Wanted]

Every year the workouts seem to start like this. Then it picks it up.

[Split T]

This workouts are a bunch of no-names. Why aren't we working out anybody who will be in the range of the #6 pick?

Perhaps we really did promise Garland or White...or we already have a trade lined up...or we’re just not reporting the visits from top prospects...or we just haven’t scheduled their visits yet...or we are just sitting in the stands of their workouts with other teams

[In2ition]

This workouts are a bunch of no-names. Why aren't we working out anybody who will be in the range of the #6 pick?

We are waiting until they get hurt and have surgery?

[specialsauce]

This workouts are a bunch of no-names. Why aren't we working out anybody who will be in the range of the #6 pick?

We are waiting until they get hurt and have surgery?

It's early. Probably going from worst to first.

[INFORMER]

This workouts are a bunch of no-names. Why aren't we working out anybody who will be in the range of the #6 pick?

Perhaps we really did promise Garland or White

I hope not.

[Cap]

Even if so, giving somebody a promise is not a reason not to look at other options. A team ahead of us might grab the guy we promised.

[Ring_Wanted]

https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1134836744803770368

[INFORMER]

I'm starting to wonder if Nickeil Alexander Walker can be converted to a point guard. His handles aren't great, and he'll never be a ball dominant passing point guard that orchestrates an offense like Jason Kidd or Steve Nash, but he has good passing instincts, plays well on and off the ball, has 2-way ability, and isn't a ball dominant scorer. And with offense going through Booker and Ayton, his skillset just might work with that plan.

[Flagrant Fowl]

I've come around on Jarrett Culver, and he'd probably be the best pick at 6 if he were to still be available. I think a Booker/Culver backcourt could work well and be much better defensively than pairing Booker with a guy like Garland or White.

Yet, I still think Clarke is the best fit, so I'd be satisfied if the Suns took him at 6 with Culver already off the board. A lot of people will say that's too high, but I don't care. There isn't much of a margin between 4 and the mid-teens, so just take the guy you like the most. The best scenario I can see is trading back and picking up an asset to take Clarke since I don't think he's a major target for a lot of teams.

I'm still holding out hope Cam Reddish shows out in his team workouts to entice a team to trade for the Suns pick. Rumors had the Knicks shopping their pick with the Hawks interested to pick RJ Barrett. Maybe the Suns could convince them to trade 10 and an asset for 6 instead of giving up both 8 and 10 to move to 3?

[Wormwood]

My draft order if we keep the 6:

1. Garland
2. White
3. Trade down for Clarke
4. Culver

Not high on Culver. He's not a freaking PG, and pairing him with Booker seems like a bad idea. I like Clarke as a defender, just wish he was a better 3 point shooter.

[Split T]

I'm starting to wonder if Nickeil Alexander Walker can be converted to a point guard. His handles aren't great, and he'll never be a ball dominant passing point guard that orchestrates an offense like Jason Kidd or Steve Nash, but he has good passing instincts, plays well on and off the ball, has 2-way ability, and isn't a ball dominant scorer. And with offense going through Booker and Ayton, his skillset just might work with that plan.

I like him. He’s a 3D pg in the George hill/Brogdon mold. Not sure if he has as many on ball skills as them, but he’s worth a look!

[Shabazz]

I think the only two players I'm "interested" in at 6 are Culver (if we make some trades BEFORE the draft) and Garland. I could get behind Clarke, but would rather we picked him up in a trade-down scenario. I'm not sure about Hunter. I go back and forth on him.

32 seems to have a number of intriguing options.

[Ring_Wanted]

I think the only two players I'm "interested" in at 6 are Culver (if we make some trades BEFORE the draft) and Garland. I could get behind Clarke, but would rather we picked him up in a trade-down scenario. I'm not sure about Hunter. I go back and forth on him.

32 seems to have a number of intriguing options.

About Clarke, would WAS be interested in him at #9? Their PF situation is certainly a mess. They don't have a GM, btw.

I wonder, because ATL could be a nice partner to trade down for their #10.

Can't see anyone taking Clarke top5, nor CHI at #7 since they have Carter.

ATL doesn't strike me as a potential destination either since they have Collins at PF. If I was the Hawks at #6 and #8, I'd look at Reddish and would take a chance on Bol Bol.

That landscape means PHX can get Clarke at #10 in case WAS passes on him. Worst case scenario, you can have Clarke or Sekou, plus another asset from the trade.

[In2ition]

I'm always a little leery of thinking that I know what other teams are thinking. I don't know, but I'm not confident that all the teams believe that Clarke isn't a top whatever player. How can you be certain that he won't be taken before 9 or 10?