What's new
By:

Following potential 2015 draftees

This draft class is really growing on me. After the hype fest of last year this one looked like a bunch of nobodies to start the season.

It's a good omen that despite the early lack of name recognition nobody's calling it a weak draft or saying it's only 11 deep. It had to have been so tempting for the media to start selling it as a weak draft, but the prospects have given them no cause to. They played well. They measured well. It's got good players at every position.

Everyone in this thread sounds like they would be fairly happy with whomever we pick. That tells me there are a lot of real players in our range. I hope we don't trade this pick. There will be some gems found in the teens this year.
 
I think I'm officially hitching myself to the FrankTheTank bandwagon. Not because I think he's gonna be the best player for us-- but moreso because it'd be hilarious and awesome if he turned out to be really damn good, and that ugly goon was killing ppl in the NBA with the Jazz uniform.

Plus, we still need a back-up big if we don't end up securing Tomic (which seems to be a very high likelihood these days)
 
Backup 5 is our current biggest hole, IMO. Drafting a 2 would give them minimal minutes, with Burks and Hood needing rotation minutes there. Mills provides a solid backup to Hayward, IMO-- maybe you can draft Stanley Johnson/Dekker/Oubre with the hope that he becomes a rich man's Sap (let's not forget how good he was defensively this season).

The 4 spot is rotationally secure. The 1 is brutal, but I think we gotta give Dante another year before we go for an established PG. This year should be about internal growth, and addressing obvious roster vacancies.

Exum/Burke
Hood/Burks
Hayward/Millsap
Favors/Booker
Gobert/Kaminsky

This feels like a solid team that should grow and snag a playoff seed, barring injury. After we attempt a play-off run, that's when we can look into "okay, should we package these picks and assets for Ty Lawson?", or something of that nature.



EDIT: Looking at that ten-man roster, the points of weakness are 1) PG, unless one (or both) up; 2) backup for Hayward. I'm quite fine with the rest, actually. A dream would be grabbing Tomic for the 5, and taking a solid backup SF with shooting for the backup 3.

Exum/Burke
Hood/Burks
Hayward/(Oubre, Dekker)
Favors/Booker
Gobert/Tomic

****ing Ante.
 
PointGod_AlecBurks said:
They scurred to do so, and it will come back to bite them in the form of blocked shots and rebounds lost. A classic case of paralysis by analysis. He's a one man wrecking crew. An All-star talent heading into a field of mostly mediocre NBA centers (many of whom aren't even true C's).

IMO - Upshaw's game translates to the league quickly. he hits on too many criteria for me to rank him outside the top-10 (hands, size, length, mobility, anticipation, instincts, aggression, coordination and functional strength).. To project him at the bottom of the 1st and then say he's got lottery talent makes me think "what exactly is being evaluated here?" Seems lazy, and leaves too much room for error for my tastes, considering his production, size and position.

I always thought Rudy would've been a good pick at #14 in '13, I feel similarly about Upshaw's prospects this year, both displayed insane flashes of untapped potential in their 20's.

I wouldn't take Rob's FT shooting too seriously, he's not hopeless. The form he was using will be totally re-worked wherever he goes, hopefully its already scrapped. He had all sorts of unsuccint movements in the lower half, as he was aiming or launching the ball to the rim. If you see the latest DX vid, it disproves the notion that hes got no range outside of the paint, It's fairly peculiar footage from someone that size IMO...

Larry Sanders; the person, the artist, the writer, the painter, the musician, the father, didnt love the game and he made that clear in his letter.

I cant say for sure; but I've done my due diligence and Robert doesn't come across like Sanders at-all.. For lack of a better word he's more simple, He comes across like a confident kid who wants to prove himself. I really dont think he's a bad guy tbh, he didn't understand the gravity of the situation at hand which is certainly odd given the circumstances. To me the positives outweigh the negative in such a landslide that I wouldn't even characterize his issues as red-flag worthy.
Click to expand...

I didnt wanna compare the guys 1:1. I just think getting thrown out of 2 programs is a problem. He'll get his chance, but teams may gamble on talents that they know wont bring poison into the locker room.

Hassan Whiteside got plenty of 2nd chances and he's still a very volatile personality.
Maybe Upshaw is also rated so low because he's a numbnut or sth. There's more to being a good Center than being a physical specimen. You need to understand a lot of stuff that happens on the floor for schemes to develop into habits. Chris Walker for example seems to be completely lost in everything thats intellectual about the game.
 
dalamon said:
I think I'm officially hitching myself to the FrankTheTank bandwagon. Not because I think he's gonna be the best player for us-- but moreso because it'd be hilarious and awesome if he turned out to be really damn good, and that ugly goon was killing ppl in the NBA with the Jazz uniform.

Plus, we still need a back-up big if we don't end up securing Tomic (which seems to be a very high likelihood these days)
Click to expand...

I learned from the Trey draft to stay away from Dal's choice.
 
dalamon said:
Backup 5 is our current biggest hole, IMO. Drafting a 2 would give them minimal minutes, with Burks and Hood needing rotation minutes there. Mills provides a solid backup to Hayward, IMO-- maybe you can draft Stanley Johnson/Dekker/Oubre with the hope that he becomes a rich man's Sap (let's not forget how good he was defensively this season).

The 4 spot is rotationally secure. The 1 is brutal, but I think we gotta give Dante another year before we go for an established PG. This year should be about internal growth, and addressing obvious roster vacancies.

Exum/Burke
Hood/Burks
Hayward/Millsap
Favors/Booker
Gobert/Kaminsky

This feels like a solid team that should grow and snag a playoff seed, barring injury. After we attempt a play-off run, that's when we can look into "okay, should we package these picks and assets for Ty Lawson?", or something of that nature.



EDIT: Looking at that ten-man roster, the points of weakness are 1) PG, unless one (or both) up; 2) backup for Hayward. I'm quite fine with the rest, actually. A dream would be grabbing Tomic for the 5, and taking a solid backup SF with shooting for the backup 3.

Exum/Burke
Hood/Burks
Hayward/(Oubre, Dekker)
Favors/Booker
Gobert/Tomic

****ing Ante.
Click to expand...

Frank says he wants to transition into a PF. Which is fine, Gobert and Favors have the center spot covered.
We would be asking Kaminsky to become the player Kanter couldn't become. His role would be crystal clear. Hit the 18 foot jump shot reliably, occasionally spot up from three, and not get killed on pick and roll defense.
 
Jazz4ever said:
Frank says he wants to transition into a PF. Which is fine, Gobert and Favors have the center spot covered.
We would be asking Kaminsky to become the player Kanter couldn't become. His role would be crystal clear. Hit the 18 foot jump shot reliably, occasionally spot up from three, and not get killed on pick and roll defense.
Click to expand...

How good is Kaminsky's PnR defense? How good are his feet/balance when switched onto a smaller player? Can he hold quicker PFs in front of him?
 
BTP said:
Who's BPA?
Click to expand...
One could argue nobody knows who BPA is, otherwise you would never have Curry going 8 (or whatever), Gobert lasting until the end of the first or take the pick of the countless busts drafted early or late steals. Instead go with need and hope you also got BPA.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but while the easy and popular answer is say to take the BPA, it may not be that simple when all is said and done.
 
When I say BPA, I mean whoever is BPA according to the board of the FO, which is the only board that matters. I just don't want them to have Booker ahead of everybody else on their board, but take Kaminsky because we need a big more than a wing, for example. That's all I mean whenever I write "draft BPA"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top