What's new

Tre Johnson Will Likely be The 5th Pick

No, you said you wouldn’t trade 21 because whoever we pick at 21 could be as good as who we pick at 5.

While that is true, the % is super small, and with that logic no team should trade any picks ever.
Most here would agree Isiah Collier and Flilpowski have both been better than Cody…

So the % of that happening is actually not that small.
 
No, you said you wouldn’t trade 21 because whoever we pick at 21 could be as good as who we pick at 5.

While that is true, the % is super small, and with that logic no team should trade any picks ever.
Ah, so you didn't read my entire post.
I ALSO said I prefer more bites at the apple (literally the exact same phrase just used) and that there isn't enough separation between VJ, Tre, and Bailey to use a pick to move up and that the player wanted at #3 has a decent chance of being there at #5. See if there was a total stud at #3 who was way better than anyone available at #5 who we knew wouldn't be there at #5 then I would totally be down with trading 21. You have to look at the entire context of the post instead of just a little part of it.
Anywho, I disagreed with your take without insulting you. Not sure I deserved an insult for my take. Shrug.
 
Last edited:
I'd rather hold onto our #21 pick because with this year's prospects in the #3-5 range, it's tough to predict what they will be after 4-5 years. Not enough separation there for me.
Yep. This is my thought as well.
 
Last edited:
Ah, so you didn't read my entire post.
I ALSO said I prefer more bites at the apple (literally the exact same phrase just used) and that there isn't enough separation between VJ, Tre, and Bailey to use a pick to move up and that the player wanted at #3 has a decent chance of being there at #5. See if there was a total stud at #3 who was way better than anyone available at #5 who we knew wouldn't be there at #5 then I would totally be down with trading 21. You have to look at the entire context of the post instead of just a little part of it.
Anywho, I disagreed with your take without insulting you. Not sure I deserved an insult for my take. Shrug.
Where did I insult you?

I know you might think there isn’t separation but that doesn’t mean the FO doesn’t think so. That was the whole premise of the post.
 
Where did I insult you?

I know you might think there isn’t separation but that doesn’t mean the FO doesn’t think so. That was the whole premise of the post.
The post I quoted was you saying what you would do not the front office. ("I’d move up to 3 to get VJ. 5 + 21 for 3")

My response was simply what I would do. We would just do different things based on the context of this draft and the draft positioning and the players likely to be available. That seems ok to me.
I felt insulted by being told my take was horrible and I don't feel like it was deserved. I didn't call your take horrible and many people seem to share my take yet they weren't told their takes were horrible.

To be honest you are usually a pretty nice poster on this site and someone I have always liked. For you to call my take horrible, and not others with extremely similar takes, made it feel a little personal.
If Cy was the one I was dealing with then it would feel less insulting since he calls dudes retarded and dumb and tells everyone they have horrible takes about everything on the regular. I guess I hold you to a higher standard. Fair or not. Maybe this ones on me and its my bad.
 
Last edited:
The issue is just that we are going to have too many guys very soon.

Already 7 guys on rookie contracts, most of them were one and done, 6 are still in need of a lot of development. One has barely played in the NBA due to injury.
Way ahead of you.

If the org isn’t very good at evaluating prospects then having an extra dice roll is probably more valuable than losing that to move up in a spot of the draft that most people think is pretty flat.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top