2009 NBA Draft (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Other Minnesota Sports] >> Minnesota Timberwolves



Message

djskillz -> 2009 NBA Draft (1/20/2009 11:51:50 PM)

Figured we needed to kick one off for 2009.



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/20/2009 11:58:18 PM)

As of right now, if the Wolves have 4 picks, I'd love to see them do something like:

1) Trade one of the 1sts, plus any 2nd's, plus players, including Miller if possible, to Charlotte for Gerald Wallace.

2) Draft Warren, if he comes out.  Rondo-like ability/ceiling, though raw.  Love his future potential.  And that's what the Wolves need.  More guys with star potential.

3) Draft Gerald Henderson.  Gifted as hell, and can be a really great rotational player at the very least IMO.  Athletic freak and can be a real weapon slashing to the basket, something the Wolves need more of.  And, this will probably be controversial, but I honestly think with his athleticism and length that he might even be able to play some SF in the NBA.  He's definitely undersized height-wise, but he has deceptive strength IMO and his vertical and length make up for a lot of that.  Kobe/Jordan can play the 3 no problem, for instance.  Henderson's shorter than those 2, but he's got a lot of the other athletic traits.  I think he could pull it off in stretches at least.

4) Draft Thabeet.  I still don't think he's great, but he's really the only true C in this draft and the Wolves still need one.  Plus, he should be a good defender, and the Wolves need that as well.  Could be a great complement on the team. 

The alternative to the above would be trading a pick for a real C with some talent, but that's usually tough to do.  Good C's are tough to come by.

Anyway, just some early thoughts on players that I'd like to see the Wolves target more than anything.



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 12:05:27 AM)

I didn't realize that the Wolves have to surrender their pick to the Clippers this year if they're not in the bottom 10.  So I hope they start losing more soon.

Also, didn't realize that Utah's pick is top-22 protected, so I hope they start winning more soon.

Lastly, looks like the Wolves have to give up their 2nd rd pick, but are gaining 2 this year.  So if everything breaks right, they have 6 draft picks.  They're definitely going to have to do some trading.



DavidAOlson -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 12:42:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

I didn't realize that the Wolves have to surrender their pick to the Clippers this year if they're not in the bottom 10.  So I hope they start losing more soon.

Also, didn't realize that Utah's pick is top-22 protected, so I hope they start winning more soon.

Lastly, looks like the Wolves have to give up their 2nd rd pick, but are gaining 2 this year.  So if everything breaks right, they have 6 draft picks.  They're definitely going to have to do some trading.



The T-wolves will win the lottery, so they'll keep that pick.

Seriously, though, I hope they don't get all the picks this year. I'd just as soon they only had a couple of first round picks this year. And they should probably just grab a couple Euros, or sell the second round picks, or trade them for picks later. The team can't really handle more than 2 rookies next year.



DavidAOlson -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 1:06:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

As of right now, if the Wolves have 4 picks, I'd love to see them do something like:

1) Trade one of the 1sts, plus any 2nd's, plus players, including Miller if possible, to Charlotte for Gerald Wallace.



Check. Might be in the works, already, waiting for Miller to be healthy.

quote:



2) Draft Warren, if he comes out.  Rondo-like ability/ceiling, though raw.  Love his future potential.  And that's what the Wolves need.  More guys with star potential.



The guy from Oklahoma, right? As a PG? I don't know why you, of all people, would compare Warren to Love. But okay. Another player like Love. Love, his future potential. Down with that.


And I agree on Thabeet. He'll be a solid defensive center in the NBA. I haven't checked his stats this year, but they were improving consistently year over year. So I suspect that he'll eventually be a competent offensive player. But if nothing else a defensive center has huge trade value.



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 1:36:00 AM)

What?  Compare him to Love?

I compared him to Rondo.  Think like there's an "I" at the beginning of that sentence, David.



DavidAOlson -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 1:40:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

What?  Compare him to Love?

I compared him to Rondo.  Think like there's an "I" at the beginning of that sentence, David.


Yep. And you said, "Love his ceiling." Have to agree.


You do know I'm kidding around, right?



David Levine -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 2:35:26 AM)

I think Thabeet has a very high bust potential. He struggles a lot when he plays against decent big men.



Ryan Buckingham -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 7:57:36 AM)

How about Nikola Pekovic, the guy they picked with the first pick of the second round last year?  I'm not sure if he only had one year left in Europe or if he can play in the NBA in 2009.  On draft night they all thought this guy was a future big-time PF/C in the NBA who was going to be the first pick of round 2 regardless what team held that pick.  Or Loukas Mavrokefalidis, the big guy they drafted in 2006?  With Collins and Booth both gone for sure next year, maybe one of them will be here.

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/nikola-pekovic

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/loukas-mavrokefalidis






Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 8:31:41 AM)

The guy I really wanted for the Wolves might not be available for them when they pick.  Jeff Teague has zoomed up the charts of late.  He might drop back down, but last time I checked, he was listed as #13 on nbadraft.net and #6 on Draftexpress.com.

With the way the Wolves have been playing, they'll have to give their #1 pick to the Clippers.  And with the way Utah has played, the Jazz will keep their pick.  So the Wolves will end up with Miami's pick and Boston's.  At this point, neither would be high enough to land Teague.



TJSweens -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 8:35:43 AM)

I don't know much about Teague. His numbers look impressive. The concern I have is whether or not he can be a full time point. He is listed on the Wake Forest page as a generic "Guard". At 6-2 / 180 I don't want another combo guard.

Is he a real PG?

As far as draft position; the Wolves are tied for the 5th worst record entering a very tough stretch of games. They are playing much better, but I don't see them sustaining the 75% winning percentage they have been on. I think there is a very good chance that they keep their own pick this year.



Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 8:49:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

I don't much about Teague. His numbers look impressive. The concern I have is whether or not he can be a full time point. He is listed on the Wake Forest page as a generic "Guard". At 6-2 / 180 I don't want another combo guard.

Is he a real PG?

As far as draft position; the Wolves are tied for the 5th worst record entering a very tough stretch of games. They are playing much better, but I don't see them sustaining the 75% winning percentage they have been on. I think there is a very good chance that they keep their own pick this year.


I hope you're right, Tim.  It's nice to see the Wolves be competitive again.  And if they were playing this way from the start of the season, they would be almost certain to forfeit the pick.  They are facing a tough stretch of games and I don't expect them to win the majority of them.  We'll see.

Teague is not a pure point guard.  He has a scorer's mentality.  Given how Foye has come on, it may make someone like Teague a little redundant.  But he has terrific vision and a high BB IQ.  He's very fast.  He could use a little weight/muscle to play better in the NBA and a (IMO) gambles a bit on defense.  But during the game against Clemson, when the Tigers were mounting their comeback, I was really impressed with the way he handled things.  He could have taken the ball down court and fired up some shots, but instead, he slowed things down and took it to the basket.  He did this over several possessions.  The combination of hitting his free throws and the clock stopping really killed Clemson's momentum.

At any rate, unless something dramatic happens, a guy like Harden will be out of reach.  I figured Teague would be a guy the Wolves could get with one of their picks. 



TJSweens -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 8:55:00 AM)

This is from Teague's NBADraftnet profile under weaknesses:

He is not a pure PG, even though he has good vision and decent ability to deliver the ball, he lacks the mentality of a playmaker … Would be in a more natural position playing off the ball, but at 6-2, defensively he would be a walking mismatch



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 8:57:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavidAOlson

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

What?  Compare him to Love?

I compared him to Rondo.  Think like there's an "I" at the beginning of that sentence, David.


Yep. And you said, "Love his ceiling." Have to agree.


You do know I'm kidding around, right?


haha.  OK.  I didn't actually.  [&:]



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:00:38 AM)

Ya, I don't see Teague as a pure PG, at least not yet, either.

And DL, again, I agree on Thabeet, and I've mentioned the same worry many times.  But this draft SUCKS for true C's.  What sucks is that I think it's pretty good for PF's, but if they draft a PF this draft, they should not be allowed to draft in the NBA for 10 years.



Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:03:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

This is from Teague's NBADraftnet profile under weaknesses:

He is not a pure PG, even though he has good vision and decent ability to deliver the ball, he lacks the mentality of a playmaker … Would be in a more natural position playing off the ball, but at 6-2, defensively he would be a walking mismatch


I guess I disagree with the assessment that he lacks the mentality of a playmaker.  He's not a "pass-first" guy, so in a world of absolutes, perhaps that means he doesn't have the mentality of a playmaker.  But I'd disagree overall.    



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:04:25 AM)

I'd rather take Warren, if he comes out.  Higher ceiling IMO, and more of a true point than a combo guy.



TJSweens -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:07:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elliot

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

This is from Teague's NBADraftnet profile under weaknesses:

He is not a pure PG, even though he has good vision and decent ability to deliver the ball, he lacks the mentality of a playmaker … Would be in a more natural position playing off the ball, but at 6-2, defensively he would be a walking mismatch


I guess I disagree with the assessment that he lacks the mentality of a playmaker.  He's not a "pass-first" guy, so in a world of absolutes, perhaps that means he doesn't have the mentality of a playmaker.  But I'd disagree overall.    


Like I said, I really no nothing about him other than what I just read in the last 15 minutes.



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:09:04 AM)

It does really depend on where the Wolves pick.  If they get lucky and pick in the top 3, they should take Rubio.



Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:22:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

I'd rather take Warren, if he comes out.  Higher ceiling IMO, and more of a true point than a combo guy.


I disagree here.  Warren is bigger than Teague.  He might eventually be a better player.  But I don't know how you could watch them both play and figure that Warren is more of a true point guard.  Teague is admittedly a combo guy, but he definitely has some PG skills.  Warren is more of a SG that can handle the ball.



djskillz -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:26:37 AM)

Warren's raw, but again, he's basically Rondo to me longterm.  Or Westbrook.  All 3 are very similar in terms of ceilings IMO.

I never go just off of college play.  I look for ceiling and likely eventual play in the NBA.  Lots of guys "light it up" in college only to be bad pros.  I think Warren's ceiling is considerably higher than Teague's, personally.



Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:36:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

It does really depend on where the Wolves pick.  If they get lucky and pick in the top 3, they should take Rubio.


I seriously doubt Rubio comes out.  I don't care what Chad Ford says; everything I've read says he has a monster buy-out and NBA teams are limited in terms of % they can contribute.



Guest -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:40:32 AM)

Warren actually has played the point quite a bit so far this season, and in the few close games Oklahoma has had this year, Warren was playing the point late in games more often than Johnson.  I would not be surprised at all if Warren ends up as a pg in the NBA. 

If Warren comes out, he'll be drafted ahead of Teague.



Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:43:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

Warren's raw, but again, he's basically Rondo to me longterm.  Or Westbrook.  All 3 are very similar in terms of ceilings IMO.

I never go just off of college play.  I look for ceiling and likely eventual play in the NBA.  Lots of guys "light it up" in college only to be bad pros.  I think Warren's ceiling is considerably higher than Teague's, personally.


I don't see the Rondo comparison, personally.  That doesn't mean that Warren might not ultimately be a better NBA talent.  But I just don't see that level of PG skills in Warren. 



Elliot -> RE: 2009 NBA Draft (1/21/2009 9:53:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pete C

Warren actually has played the point quite a bit so far this season, and in the few close games Oklahoma has had this year, Warren was playing the point late in games more often than Johnson.  I would not be surprised at all if Warren ends up as a pg in the NBA. 

If Warren comes out, he'll be drafted ahead of Teague.


I can see why Warren would essentially play PG down the stretch for OK.  He can handle the ball and score.  But I don't think he has great PG skills.  Maybe he will develop them.  I agree that PG is likely his position in the NBA, because at 6'3", he's undersized for an NBA SG.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode