What's new
By:

Following potential 2013 draftees

With the overall dearth of PGs, how high will MCW climb on the draft board? It's completely conceivable that reaches well into the top 10, right?

Honest questions to the gurus.
 
Based on a few conversations I've had with some guys that get paid to evaluate, I'd be surprised if any of them reach top 10. The buzz right now seems to be much more heavily weighted toward MCW. Obviously this will change a couple times as these trends ebb and flow throughout each season. I'm not hearing much overly positive about BJ Young and not much regarding Trey either. There's actually a bit more about McCollum than these guys, but even that isn't much..

I just don't see many teams gambling much just because the position is a need. I would say, at this point, MCW is the only PG with a chance to crack the top 10 and it's not likely .. 12 - 15, I'd say.
 
GVC said:
Trey Burke's my guy fwiw. Pushes the ball relentlessly, and probes the paint effectively in the halfcourt. Perfect PG for Favors and the rest of the younguns.
Click to expand...

For the Jazz;

Trey - For reasons above
CJ - Spreading the floor (just hate his assists numbers)
MCW - For size and upside
Young - Pass
 
I don't think it is much of an exaggeration to call our PG situation desperate. That, and given MCW's ability to slide to SG, I wouldn't mind at all if we went after both MCW and Burke.

What say y'all?
 
NAOS said:
I don't think it is much of an exaggeration to call our PG situation desperate. That, and given MCW's ability to slide to SG, I wouldn't mind at all if we went after both MCW and Burke.

What say y'all?
Click to expand...

Dumb. Have you looked at MCW's shooting numbers? And our clutter of wings?
 
I definitely only like MCW at PG. He'd be taken way too high if he was played at SG. If I knew I could get Burke, I'd take someone else. (and vice versa)
 
orangello said:
I think these are both fair points.
Click to expand...

Yes, except even without the clutter, playing him at the 2 makes no sense given his awful shooting numbers--37.2%/20.5%. That makes Kendall Marshall look like Steve Kerr and we want to consider playing this kid at the 2? Dumb. It shouldn't even be in the discussion.
 
I wouldn't draft both with the notion that MCW would play significant minutes at SG. The method is simple:

1. Not all players pan out
2. we have zero PGs under contract at year's end, and therefore we need two.
3. Hopefully one guy deserves to be a starting pg. Remember... desperation.
4. If both players are legit, then minutes with both on the floor is possible. In fact, given the dearth of playmaking, perhaps this would be awesome.


Waiting for Gyp's dumb comment about dumbness...
 
Only problem, NAOS, is that it's quite possible that neither turn into a legit starter. Maybe I just haven't quite grasped the gravity of building a team in Utah, but it still seems to me that we should be able to build 80% of our team through the draft (Kanter, Burks, Hayward), trades that have already been done (Favors), and make a major move to fix the last 20% through FA.

I realize it may very well be an overly romanticized notion, but taking a couple more very nice pieces in the draft, the ridding of some contracts, and going after Rondo as a near-max and contender would be my dream strat.
 
NAOS said:
I wouldn't draft both with the notion that MCW would play significant minutes at SG. The method is simple:

1. Not all players pan out
2. we have zero PGs under contract at year's end, and therefore we need two.
3. Hopefully one guy deserves to be a starting pg. Remember... desperation.
4. If both players are legit, then minutes with both on the floor is possible. In fact, given the dearth of playmaking, perhaps this would be awesome.


Waiting for Gyp's dumb comment about dumbness...
Click to expand...

I am going to steer clear here of arguing because it's a new year and I'm going to try to be a better person. I simply feel that drafting both makes absolutely no sense as a) MCW can not and should not ever play the 2 based on his numbers which is why all of this started...b) Having two rookie 1st round points could cause contention...c) we need a vet (or two) at point like we have now unless we want to run two rookie points out there for 48 minutes a night and have no one to mentor (i'd draft burke and re-sign tinsley and possibly watson if he doesn't mind not playing)...d) it's a waste of a pick...basically you're hoping one of two pans out like it's throwing darts...this is basically what you're doing with your numbers 1-3 and it's not a bright move at all imo...we need to draft a pg (i think burke the more i read) and the best available, not two point guards.
 
PKM said:
Only problem, NAOS, is that it's quite possible that neither turn into a legit starter. Maybe I just haven't quite grasped the gravity of building a team in Utah, but it still seems to me that we should be able to build 80% of our team through the draft (Kanter, Burks, Hayward), trades that have already been done (Favors), and make a major move to fix the last 20% through FA.

I realize it may very well be an overly romanticized notion, but taking a couple more very nice pieces in the draft, the ridding of some contracts, and going after Rondo as a near-max and contender would be my dream strat.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely fair.

I realize my scenario is desperate and conservative. We need to fix this position soon and thoroughly. And, yeah, I'm not holding my breath on FAs, especially of Rondo's ilk.
 
Here are my favorite parts of the article:

Not better, I said. Different. Doesn't have Jimmer Range, or anything resembling Jimmer's jumper, but does a better job creating for others, figuring out ways to score from mid-range, and not turning the ball over. He's an actual point guard, too. Whether you like traditional stats -- 21.2 points, 5.9 assists, 5.1 rebounds as a junior while leading SDSU to its first NCAA tournament bid -- or advanced stats -- a 115.5 offensive rating while using a whopping 32.5 percent of his team's possessions -- Wolters looks quite good.
Click to expand...

And

Shaquille Davis, a 19-year-old from Hempstead, was an actual Natehead. He showed up specifically to see Wolters. "Two years ago, my friend told me about him, but I didn't pay attention because I'm like, 'South Dakota State, where the hell is that?'" Davis said. "But then I saw his game against Washington last year -- he had 34 [points], he destroyed Terrence Ross and Tony Wroten, so I'm like, 'I have to pay more attention to this kid.' This was my chance to see him."
Click to expand...

Enjoy
 
NAOS said:
This is absolutely fair.

I realize my scenario is desperate and conservative. We need to fix this position soon and thoroughly. And, yeah, I'm not holding my breath on FAs, especially of Rondo's ilk.
Click to expand...

It's okay to lie to me and give me hope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top