You can't definitely say that either of those two players will be better than Beal. Drummond is just not very good, and Robinson (who I like a lot) is an undersized PF. Why draft at these positions when Beal can easily be better and can help our team right away, rather than having another project at 4 or 5...that's the last thing we need.
If we're talking about avoiding projects, the only players in the top 10 who wouldn't be considered projects, are Beal and Barnes (IMO).
Agreed, however he also plays for UNC and we have seen some of their players in the past transition well to the NBA as the system they play doesn't always flatter their individual game. Vince was very much like that when he went to UNC. The fact remains that he improved his numbers from year 1 to year 2 (outside of rebounding but they had Henson and Zeller).Quote:
Matt52 wrote:
I'm not the biggest Barnes fan however if he kills it in pre-draft workouts I feel his name will rise again because physically he is more impressive or prototypical than the other wing players (Beal, MKG, etc).
Well that is sort of my point and maybe I'm not translating thought to writing properly. But when you're in a situation where you're drafting in the range the Raptors will be where there is no clear ranking of who is better than the other, and you're looking at a bunch of players that all have the ability to be stars then should you not base your pick on need? The only thing the combines will clarify are size and athletecism which will improve the stocks of guys like Drummond and Barnes and perhaps hurt that of Beal and Robinson being that they are a bit undersized to play at their position in Robinson's case or a bit less athletic than other SG's in Beals case. Theres always other intangibles like leadership, intellect etc which you can gather from interviews, but their isn't a clear cut heirarchy in the the range we will likely be drafting imo.Quote:
Matt52 wrote:
Doesn't that imply you are drafting based on a need at that position and not necessarily the best player available?Quote:
BallaBalla wrote:
Anyone can learn defense. It's about hard work and knowning you match ups(more hard work). That's what Dennis Rodman says anyway.Quote:
Nilanka wrote:
Drafting players, evaluating talent, and determining ability at the next level isn't an exact science. Some people and organizations are better at it than others. At the moment of truth come draft night, you have to live by your evaluation and gut and pick the player you feel is best - regardless of position. If there was an exact science to it all, there would be no busts (outside of injury).Quote:
Mediumcore wrote:
To interject...I dont see it that way. Beal is a SG...and so is DD. This makes the Beal selection a BPA in my view since we already have the position filled. This exercise is fun but really bears no resemblance to the actual machinations which come into play on draft day. We simply dont know whats in store. Apart from the this being the prelimnary stages of the evaluation process (except for possibly the top 2 spots) one has to factor in what a gm has in place/or working on in areas such as trades, free agency, final draft position thru the lottery or trading up or down. Some of these events can have a bearing on both BPA as well as need.Quote:
Mediumcore wrote:
I have a feeling if we pick fifth we'll be trading it to move up a spot or two.
If you draft Beal it doesn't mean DeMar's necessarily gone much less benched. Not right away, anyways.
Coming off the bench, rather.
Say we do pick Beal. Who does Colangelo target in free agency or a trade to play at the small forward position...for arguement sake lets leave out DeMar, Batum, and G. Wallace. Do you roll with JJ?
JJ (provided he's still around) I think, just for familiarity sake. I wouldn't be shocked if BC worked the 2 second rounders for a SF in the draft though. Darius Miller maybe?
I could see BC work out a trade for Chandler too.
You go for a big splash. Some sort of package involving Bargnani and Calderon for Rudy Gay ;)Quote:
Mediumcore wrote:
I think they roll with JJ/Kleiza. But from a trade point of view there are lots of options depending on what other teams want to do. I think Wilson Chandler is a possibility (similar to how Denver traded Nene only a few months after signing a big contract). Other possibilities (although long shots) are guys like Granger, Iggy, or Gay. Or from free agency guys like Ilyasova or Kirilenko. Then there is also the option of bringing back Weems (not a fan of this personally but is always a possibility).Quote:
Mediumcore wrote:
There is also the option of getting a guy from the 2nd round.. or late in the first round if we move up. My preference would be Nicholson.
A rebuild doesn't have to happen over night. Although we'd all like to see a solid starting 5 next season, we may have to wait a little longer to find our SF or our PG for example.
Theres a good point to be made there about trying to establish some guys like JJ going forward for as you say familiarity sake. If there isn't an sure upgrade available then stick with a guy that knows and fits with the defensive system. Chandler would be nice, but I don't see him coming over unless we pay more than what he's worth.Quote:
ceez wrote:
Tempting, but losing two vets for the price of one on a an already young team about to get even younger next season...ouch!Quote:
Nilanka wrote:
Can't argue with that logic.Quote:
planetmars wrote:
Outside of exceptions, I don't think free agency will be where the Raptors make their big splash. I could be wrong but that TPE from Barbosa is useless if the Raptors wait for free agency.Quote:
planetmars wrote:
To put it in perspective, in looking at additions to the roster for next season, as things stand now the Raptors have $13.5M to spend ($11M plus $2.5M top up exception) in free agency versus adding up to $18.6M via trades ($11M plus $7.6M) and then another nearly $7M via exceptions ($5M MLE, $1.8M Bi-annual).
So considering free agency usually almost always ends up in over paying for talent (with this year being even a greater risk considering the number of teams with cap room), which would you rather?
$13.5M via straight free agency
or
$25.6M via trades and exceptions.
(*Don't forget minimum contracts can be added once a team is above and beyond the salary cap. A lot people have been talking about trading the picks, myself included, but some seniors coming out of the NCAA could be interesting picks in the 2nd round. Seniors aren't necessarily going to step in right away - right, Adam Morrison? - but they would be less of a project and help to cheaply fill out the roster and maybe they get that elusive diamond in the rough).
In a way you're right. But at the same time, I am saying that it's not clear from this draft and the scouting reports who the best player available truly is. I (obviously) have no clue what BC is thinking, but if we have a chance to draft 4 or 5 guys with potential to play PF, we are better off picking a 2 guard with just as much potential to help our team.Quote:
Mediumcore wrote:
AD aside, I just don't see how we can toss another PF into the mix.