Everything 2018 NBA draft

[Apollo]

An anonymous scout's opinion on various draft things:

On Doncic:

There’s really varied opinion. I think there’s potentially three franchise-changing bigs at the top of the draft, and if you pass on one of those for Doncic and he doesn’t pan out, you’re fired.

I don’t think he has enough scoring ego to be amongst the league leaders in scoring, but certainly he could be one of the more prolific stat-sheet stuffing guys, so probably at best, the second-best guy on a really good team.

I don’t think he’s a franchise-altering piece but he could be the second or third best guy on a championship team

I think he’s going to have a good NBA career.

Who's the best player in the draft?:

Deandre Ayton. He hasn’t even come close to reaching his potential and what he can do and how gifted he is, the guy should be a borderline superstar.. Ayton, and there’s not much more to it.

Outside of Cleveland, who's in the hot seat?:

Memphis, because their jobs are on the line. Phoenix’s jobs are on the line too, but you’re picking No. 1 at least you get Ayton. Memphis, it’s a little less certain the guy they get at No. 4 is great, especially because they have lofty expectations...Sacramento cannot mess this opportunity up….the No. 2 pick wouldn’t seem like a difficult situation, but I don’t know if the answer is totally clear on who it should be and where they fit into the Kings’ team specifically…Atlanta, I don’t know which direction they go in their roster at all.

On draft depth:

Not necessarily. It’s tough because the most recent thing you have in your mind is last year, which I think will shape up as one of the best drafts in a while. I think it’s a little to do with that, that this one isn’t as deep…There’s good players in every draft and there will be players later in this one that pan out. but on the whole, I don't know…It’s not as deep as last year’s, I feel like there’s a lot more questionable guys, flaws with everyone up at the top, so from a star potential perspective—I mean last year, Donovan at 13, Lauri Markkanen, even Kyle Kuzma…picking in the 40s you can get a solid rotation guy this year, maybe…You’re going to get depth as far as role players and rotation players, but I can’t tell you it’s a superstar-laden draft..My idea of deep is you’re just as likely to get a good player at 35 as at 25, maybe 45 as at 35, so you reach a certain point where maybe there are 18 guys in this draft that could be a big-time starter down the road, and after that you’re still picking some pretty good players that maybe someone could have taken at say, 25 if they liked them…I just think you have a really good chance, as good as any other year, if not better, to get the same type of talent in the late 30s that you might be swinging on in the 20s. I think that’s kind of the sweet spot. There’ll be some really interesting players that go in the 20s. Portland could be in a worse position right now sitting at 24. If you’re getting a handful of rotation players in the second round...You can probably get to the mid-30s and feel relatively confident about who you’re getting. After 35, 40 players there’s not a lot of guys I’d be super ecstatic about in the second round where you’re like man, he has a real chance…a lot of those prospects you’re like, meh. As we get into the second round, there’s not a lot of excitement. There’s not a lot of game changers. And it’s a weak international group. I think there are a lot of high risk/high reward guys. Hamidou Diallo could be something. Billy Preston could he be something? Trevon Duval. They could move the needle, or would you rather take a safer bet. With this group there’s just a lot of potential failures...There’s an obvious top eight or nine and six or seven other guys in the mix for the lottery. That’s all you need to know.

There's a lot more, go here: https://www.si.com/nba/2018/06/19/nb...michael-porter

[DanH]

Cool, but during the regular season Serge's best pairing was with Pascal. In the playoffs, he was never paired with Pascal. Instead, they had him in numerous lineups as the only big, often with CJ as the next "big." The -5 net rating is still a negative. I'm arguing that it's partially a personnel issue.

But, as I dig deeper in these stats, what the hell was Casey doing? Some of these lineups are bad ideas. Maybe if you have 3's who can legit guard PFs, but I'm seeing CJ as the "4" in way too many playoff lineups. Heck, I'm seeing CJ in way too many of these playoff lineups period. Replace half of those with a long 3 who can actually switch onto PFs and on paper that resolves a lot of deficiencies.

As I said, that's a major flaw in their current roster. OG is basically the only modern SF on the roster. They could have easily hidden CJ defensively if they were deeper at forward.

The fact that the Raps best net rating lineup had their best players on it doesn't change the fact that Serge is not being put in a position to succeed when he's on the court. He did disappoint these playoffs.

Again, how does drafting a guard resolve the forward and PF issues the team clearly has? Serge played Center in every lineup he was in accept when he played with the starters (from what I can see). Probably because he's a modern center. Wouldn't it be nice if he was paired with a modern, small ball 4 when he played the 5?

The Raps went into the playoffs with 4 point guards, 4 Centers, 2 SGs, 2 SFs, and 1 PF. Of the 3 forwards that dressed, 2 could switch onto bigger players and the other was CJ -- who is a great leader, has value as a shooter, but should not be switching onto PFs. To me that's an obvious deficiency. Issues with properly filling the forward positions is a consistent narrative that has followed the Raps for years. Resolve that, and then make whatever trades they want for their dream guard.

I'm not against trading Lowry and/or Demar, but if they don't find at least a solid defensive minded 3/4 and (ideally) a legit PF as well, they're going to run into the same issues over and over again.

Ibaka wasn't paired with Siakam? They played together about proportionally to how much they did in-season, and had a -6 net rating together. Never mind that Ibaka at C is an extremely situation-dependent look, and has to be used sparingly to be effective. He really, really is not a C, and that perception of him is very damaging. He's a small ball C. Which is a matchup look. He only made sense to use as much as he was at C because Poeltl was having a horrendous playoffs.

Ibaka at 4 was fine. He wasn't worth his contract, but he also wasn't the reason the team did so poorly. Didn't help, but the problems were DeMar and Casey.

[Ebonhawke]

Why assume that's enough? I wouldn't do that deal personally if I'm the Grizz. It would be incredibly shortsighted.

The perception is that the Grizz are in a 'win-now' mode with Conley/Gasol. With the Grizz' style of play (slooooow), it would make sense that they would value a player, who was able to create his own offense, rather than requiring other players to facilitate (like many 3-point specialists). They'd be less likely to trade for someone whose offense may have arisen off of ball movement (since the failed Chandler Parsons experiment).

[planetmars]

The rules are fuzzy at the draft. The teams can agree to the deal, then the Clips could just select the players the Raptors want, and trade them their rights after the draft. Then the rule about future picks wouldn't apply to the 2018 picks, and they'd be good because they'd have their 2020, so not having their 2019 is no issue. Pretty common mechanism for draft day deals (technically, picks can't be traded between the evening of the day before the draft until the pick is used).

Okay so it seems like a loop hole to the Stepien rule. The rule seems to only really apply during the season which usually only goes into affect by the deadline (as most trades don't happen before then).

[DanH]

Okay so it seems like a loop hole to the Stepien rule. The rule seems to only really apply during the season which usually only goes into affect by the deadline (as most trades don't happen before then).

It also applies to future picks, like if at this draft, the Raptors wanted to trade their 2019 and 2020 picks, they couldn't (even after their 2018 pick passes and is no longer a future pick). It's meant to stop teams from damaging themselves too much long term. Once you get to the current draft, the long term implications of moving that pick are far less.

[Barolt]

The perception is that the Grizz are in a 'win-now' mode with Conley/Gasol. With the Grizz' style of play (slooooow), it would make sense that they would value a player, who was able to create his own offense, rather than requiring other players to facilitate (like many 3-point specialists). They'd be less likely to trade for someone whose offense may have arisen off of ball movement (since the failed Chandler Parsons experiment).

Their owner flat out said he thinks they can win 50 games next season. They are definitely in win-now mode.

[Apollo]

Their owner flat out said he thinks they can win 50 games next season. They are definitely in win-now mode.

They get Conley back, they keep Evans, they hit a homerun at #4 and they add a couple good role players in FA it's not inconceivable they improve by 27 wins. They had 43 wins two seasons ago. If they make the moves I mentioned, which is a conservative play, they're better than that 43 win team.

[Ebonhawke]

They get Conley back, they keep Evans, they hit a homerun at #4 and they add a couple good role players in FA it's not inconceivable they improve by 27 wins. They had 43 wins two seasons ago. If they make the moves I mentioned, which is a conservative play, they're better than that 43 win team.

Just playing a bit of devil's advocate, but...

In the West, Houston, Golden State, Portland, OKC, Utah, New Orleans, San Antonio, Minnesota, and Denver all had more than 43 wins last year - Denver, with 46 wins, didn't even make the playoffs. The Spurs didn't have Kawhi for most of the year, and if he's dealt, the assets returning to San Antonio would likely improve that team. OKC might be the only team to stumble, depending on how free agency plays out.

You also have the looming spectre of a potential Lebron / Paul George-led team arising in Laker-land. Winning 50 games in the West might only get you the #7 or #8 seed in the West next year, which some owners might not consider 'winning', and hitting a homerun at #4 and possibly adding a role player or two in free agency might not be enough to satisfy the appetite of said owner.

[DanH]

They get Conley back, they keep Evans, they hit a homerun at #4 and they add a couple good role players in FA it's not inconceivable they improve by 27 wins. They had 43 wins two seasons ago. If they make the moves I mentioned, which is a conservative play, they're better than that 43 win team.

Agreed! But if they instead trade the #4 for an established star, you'd think they'd be that much more likely to be able to leap 27 wins. Which is why people think they are a viable destination for DeMar.

[Apollo]

Just playing a bit of devil's advocate, but...

In the West, Houston, Golden State, Portland, OKC, Utah, New Orleans, San Antonio, Minnesota, and Denver all had more than 43 wins last year - Denver, with 46 wins, didn't even make the playoffs. The Spurs didn't have Kawhi for most of the year, and if he's dealt, the assets returning to San Antonio would likely improve that team. OKC might be the only team to stumble, depending on how free agency plays out.

You also have the looming spectre of a potential Lebron / Paul George-led team arising in Laker-land. Winning 50 games in the West might only get you the #7 or #8 seed in the West next year, which some owners might not consider 'winning', and hitting a homerun at #4 and possibly adding a role player or two in free agency might not be enough to satisfy the appetite of said owner.

Hey, I'm not the one who tossed out the 50 win number. These teams are businesses and if I'm an owner I don't particularly like the idea of a GM making up for the Parson mistake by coughing up the #4 pick in a top heavy draft in exchange for a player who arguably is no more talented than the guys on the board at #4 and who is already 29 years old. To me that doesn't make much business sense because my business if far more worse off in a couple years than if I kept the pick. Also, if it's as dire as you said then maybe I veto that trade and opt to fire the guy anyway at the end of next season if he can't make it work with what he's built today plus the luck of holding the #4 pick. I mean I don't have much faith in him if all I can get is a competence eraser and DD for the #4, who might be a superstar in three years.

[DanH]

Hey, I'm not the one who tossed out the 50 win number. These teams are businesses and if I'm an owner I don't particularly like the idea of a GM making up for the Parson mistake by coughing up the #4 pick in a top heavy draft in exchange for a player who arguably is no more talented than the guys on the board at #4 and who is already 29 years old. To me that doesn't make much business sense because my business if far more worse off in a couple years than if I kept the pick. Also, if it's as dire as you said then maybe I veto that trade and opt to fire the guy anyway at the end of next season if he can't make it work with what he's built today plus the luck of holding the #4 pick.

No one is saying the Grizzlies are smart to think they can win now, nor that they should be making this sort of move. We are saying they look like a team primed to make a mistake, and it would be nice to be on the other end of that mistake.

[Barolt]

No one is saying the Grizzlies are smart to think they can win now, nor that they should be making this sort of move. We are saying they look like a team primed to make a mistake, and it would be nice to be on the other end of that mistake.

This is a great moment to have Masai calling the shots for the Raptors - it's a weird draft and a lot of teams look like they're going to make really bad decisions, and that's where great GMs feast.

[white men can't jump]

No one is saying the Grizzlies are smart to think they can win now, nor that they should be making this sort of move. We are saying they look like a team primed to make a mistake, and it would be nice to be on the other end of that mistake.

And as one of the smaller and poorer markets, another year or two of playoff revenue before tanking is a big deal. So they may not consider it a mistake even if they know it prolongs a rebuild without really making them a serious contender.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[A.I]

Hey, I'm not the one who tossed out the 50 win number. These teams are businesses and if I'm an owner I don't particularly like the idea of a GM making up for the Parson mistake by coughing up the #4 pick in a top heavy draft in exchange for a player who arguably is no more talented than the guys on the board at #4 and who is already 29 years old. To me that doesn't make much business sense because my business if far more worse off in a couple years than if I kept the pick. Also, if it's as dire as you said then maybe I veto that trade and opt to fire the guy anyway at the end of next season if he can't make it work with what he's built today plus the luck of holding the #4 pick. I mean I don't have much faith in him if all I can get is a competence eraser and DD for the #4, who might be a superstar in three years.

Not everyone thinks the same as you. Look at the Nets for example, traded a ton of picks for Pierce (36), KG (37) and Johnson (34) just because they wanted to make a splash and win now. Of course that failed miserably.

Grizzlies are in a weird spot. They have Gasol and Conley, who will help your team get wins, so either you go all in and try to win or you trade them and rebuild. If you keep the #4 pick along with Gasol and Conley, they turn into a treadmill team for a couple of seasons. Derozan, in the short term will help them get wins more than a rookie. Considering the owner already said they are in “win now mode”, as DanH said, they are primed to make a mistake.

[Apollo]

No one is saying the Grizzlies are smart to think they can win now, nor that they should be making this sort of move. We are saying they look like a team primed to make a mistake, and it would be nice to be on the other end of that mistake.

I just don't buy it. Desperation is never a position to take in deal making but you're neglecting one key point besides what I've said so far. Answer me this:

Do you think DD is the best asset they can get for #4 in this draft + Chandler Parsons?

There are a handful of franchises out there who maybe primed to hit the reset button and this is a damn fine draft to take the chance. This would not be a one team auction.