2021 NBA Draft Preview (new thread)

[Handlogten's Heros]

I remember when Phoenix gave up an extra first round pick just to move up 7 spots and get Mikal Bridges... weird move.

I also remember when the Jazz gave up former lotto pick Trey Lyles to move up just 11 spots... IDK is it worth it?

I get it... doesn't always work that way... but let's not ignore the fact that 7 spots higher gives you maybe 2x-3x times of a chance at finding something good.

 

[KqWIN]

Lots of assumptions there... I am not saying the draft can be solved but as you said...its a crap shoot. There are players good enough to take a chance on in the range that we traded picks in the 30s because we didn't like anyone else... there was literally an MVP of the league selected after our pick in one of those drafts. Its a crap shoot... I get it but your scouting has to extend past only guys you love to guys that are worth a shot... and if you don't feel those others are worth a shot... then you aren't doing a good enough job.

I outlined scenarios where I'd trade the pick for a win now piece. That's fine.

I think GMs have a vested interest in deferring and kicking the can down the road to create job security. It's why these guys love getting 100 future first when they trade a star... can't judge the deal until the picks happen.

There is a time value of picks equation here too... the #30 is worth what pick next year? What if it conveys in 2 years? 3 years? No one is giving an unprotected 1st for #30. We are in a situation where we need young talent in the pipeline now... so the timing aspect really doesn't work in your favor. There are some situations where getting a future first for a current first make sense... like OKC or Houston that have maybe too many firsts this year to get value out of all of them. That is not our situation at all.

I strongly disagree that it is a sign of bad scouting or that it can be solved by better scouting. Great scouting could just as easily inform that there isn’t someone worth it and that trading it provides more value. Those great scouts could very easily say that this draft is trash and you have better chances another year.

The existence of draft surprises and not being able to identify them does not mean scouting is bad. If you think the move is bad because someone was drafted that panned out I think you have an incredibly u realistic view of the draft.

I don’t understand the point about scouting extending to only the guys you love. The only way to find guys you love is to extend your scouting. By having guys you love, you have by definition scouted beyond those guys. Makes no sense that having guys you prefer shows poor range of scouting.

By the way, if you’re trading a pick for a future pick, you still have a pick. Any stock you put in that draft pick will literally be repeated whenever that pick conveys. I understand that there’s value to have something sooner rather than later, but if you don’t like what you see I really don’t see the problem with keeping your options open.

It depends on the situation, but I would agree that some GMs have a vested interested on continuously pointing towards the future. The Jazz are in the exact opposite situation. Trading the pick for a future pick would be very unpopular with fans and puts pressure on the FO to make that asset useful soon. Another reason to move the pick is if you have the intention to trade it, but the trade isn’t there at the time.

 

[LoPo]

When NO uses their cap space to overpay Lowry (which is definitely plan A right now) does that change your opinion. When Memphis lands their 2nd or 3rd blue chip guy (depending on JJJ and his health) will that change your opinion? That is what both teams are trying to do. Bledsoe can be mothballed and I still like it for Memphis because it makes sense. JV wanted to get paid and is slightly off of Ja's timeline.

Cap space means nothing until it turns into players. Lets see what they do. To me it looks like they are leveraging future assets to go all in for the 8 seed because Griffin about to get canned.

I also find some inconsistency when you talk about the value of firsts in the 20s here than when you talk about the value of firsts in the 20s when looking at the Conley deal.

Well if Memphis drafts the next Donovan at #10, then sure it looks great. But if #10 is like most #10 in a draft, it's a bad deal.

JV is better than Adams
Bledsoe is overpaid and doesn't really fit on Memphis

The Memphis side of this deal would have made sense on a roster like ours if we got two useful role players for a team on the brink of a title. But Memphis isn't that. Instead, they are going to forfeit $38 million of cap space the last couple years before Morant starts a massive extension.

NOLA, on the other hand, is going to 100% maximize what they can with Zion and Ingram. So according to what you're saying - if they overpay Lowry, they still have a better team with Lowry and JV than they would have ever had with Adams and Bledsoe.

So unless Memphis destroys the pick, NOLA wins this trade easily. And it's also possible that NOLA gets a better player at #17 than Memphis gets at #10.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I strongly disagree that it is a sign of bad scouting or that it can be solved by better scouting. Great scouting could just as easily inform that there isn’t someone worth it and that trading it provides more value. Those great scouts could very easily say that this draft is trash and you have better chances another year.

The existence of draft surprises and not being able to identify them does not mean scouting is bad. If you think the move is bad because someone was drafted that panned out I think you have an incredibly u realistic view of the draft.

I don’t understand the point about scouting extending to only the guys you love. The only way to find guys you love is to extend your scouting. By having guys you love, you have by definition scouted beyond those guys. Makes no sense that having guys you prefer shows poor range of scouting.

If you are only willing to make a pick if there are guys you love... that is a problem. Its a common GM thing to say that sounds good but leads to mistakes... remember Brooklyn trading the pick that became Damian Lillard because they only protected the pick 1-3 because there were only three guys they liked.

You said it yourself... the draft is a crap shoot... deferring picks because you are sure this draft is probably valuing your analysis too highly. The guys you pick from at #30 are likely not meaningfully different from the guys you'd pick from at #25ish next year.

You may see it as bold or smart to keep your options open... but i've been fed a lot of BS over the years as a Jazz fans about "flexibility, powder being dry, etc." that were really just wishy washy leadership.

In our current situation trading #30 just for a first next year (it would be protected) would be a mistake. Do we need trade assets? yes! We need a good young player in the pipeline even more though. We can burn a couple firsts for a guy like RoCo like Portland did last year and have it turn out to be a bad deal too... there are lots of ways to fail. NBA is hard.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

That's interesting. I'd think Wagner or Moody are a better fit but don't know much about Giddey.

Think Joe Ingles but further along at a much younger age without the developed jumper

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Well if Memphis drafts the next Donovan at #10, then sure it looks great. But if #10 is like most #10 in a draft, it's a bad deal.

JV is better than Adams
Bledsoe is overpaid and doesn't really fit on Memphis

The Memphis side of this deal would have made sense on a roster like ours if we got two useful role players for a team on the brink of a title. But Memphis isn't that. Instead, they are going to forfeit $38 million of cap space the last couple years before Morant starts a massive extension.

NOLA, on the other hand, is going to 100% maximize what they can with Zion and Ingram. So according to what you're saying - if they overpay Lowry, they still have a better team with Lowry and JV than they would have ever had with Adams and Bledsoe.

So unless Memphis destroys the pick, NOLA wins this trade easily. And it's also possible that NOLA gets a better player at #17 than Memphis gets at #10.

Unless NOLA does something awesome with the cap space they just cleared its a win for Memphis. The draft odds at #10 aren't great but you have about a 25% chance at landing a blue chip guy... at #17 it is waaaaaaayyyyyy worse. Just look at the draft history of the last 5ish years from 15-20... It might be a 5-10% chance. Blue chip talent is the toughest thing to acquire.

Rumors are Bledsoe is headed elsewhere already. Gonna guess this might be a Laker Kuzma/Montrez deal. Just a guess doe.

 

[KqWIN]

If you are only willing to make a pick if there are guys you love... that is a problem. Its a common GM thing to say that sounds good but leads to mistakes... remember Brooklyn trading the pick that became Damian Lillard because they only protected the pick 1-3 because there were only three guys they liked.

You said it yourself... the draft is a crap shoot... deferring picks because you are sure this draft is probably valuing your analysis too highly. The guys you pick from at #30 are likely not meaningfully different from the guys you'd pick from at #25ish next year.

You may see it as bold or smart to keep your options open... but i've been fed a lot of BS over the years as a Jazz fans about "flexibility, powder being dry, etc." that were really just wishy washy leadership.

In our current situation trading #30 just for a first next year (it would be protected) would be a mistake. Do we need trade assets? yes! We need a good young player in the pipeline even more though. We can burn a couple firsts for a guy like RoCo like Portland did last year and have it turn out to be a bad deal too... there are lots of ways to fail. NBA is hard.

So you want teams to draft players that they don't like? I guess we have different thoughts on that. In any case, it really doesn't make sense to call trading the pick a sign of good/bad scouting. Great scouting could inform the decision either way. Making the pick regardless of what your scouting thinks is not a point for great scouting.

I think it's bold because it is a move that you know, without fail, will be unfavorable to the fanbase. There's no doubt about that. In a win now situation there's obviously a lot of pressure from ownership as well. It's not the easy move, that's for sure.

Trading #30 is only a mistake depending on what the following up moves are. The NBA is hard, and one of those ways to fail is missing on the 30th pick. I do hesitate to call it failure, however, because the likelihood of players amounting to something at this stage of the draft is low.

Now I know you might be thinking of all the anecdotes of when it did work out. Rudy Gobert was drafted #27 and without him we can't even think about winning. But you can't rely on anecdotes to make decisions. You will always find a counterexample. You may think of Robert Covington as fail, but the Bucks just moved a conditional first for PJ Tucker and they probably don't win the title without him. Trading first isn't good or bad on it's own, it depends on the player you get and the context you're bringing him into.

You can either make the pick, trade it now, punt it back and trade it later, or punt it back and select. All are reasonable options depending on how you the many confounding variables. If were to go with one of the latter option I don't see it as a sign of cowardice. Having a pick in hand to trade could be handy.

 

[zyzz]

So apparently Bledsoe won’t be staying in Memphis and will be on the move again. And Memphis is trying to move up again from 10. Givony said Memphis worked out Moody privately in LA in anticipation of their moves. Also interview Bouknight and Kuminga. I assume pick 7 is the most available pick in that range?

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Pels get off Adams and Bledsoe and only slide back 7 spots. JV also has more offensive versatility. Nice deal for them.
Memphis must really be hunting someone in the lottery.

 

[slc]

So does Memphis/ NO trade this early signal there may be a lot of trades for this draft?
Bucks/ Suns final maybe shows you don't need a super team to win?

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

So you want teams to draft players that they don't like? I guess we have different thoughts on that. In any case, it really doesn't make sense to call trading the pick a sign of good/bad scouting. Great scouting could inform the decision either way. Making the pick regardless of what your scouting thinks is not a point for great scouting.

I think it's bold because it is a move that you know, without fail, will be unfavorable to the fanbase. There's no doubt about that. In a win now situation there's obviously a lot of pressure from ownership as well. It's not the easy move, that's for sure.

Trading #30 is only a mistake depending on what the following up moves are. The NBA is hard, and one of those ways to fail is missing on the 30th pick. I do hesitate to call it failure, however, because the likelihood of players amounting to something at this stage of the draft is low.

Now I know you might be thinking of all the anecdotes of when it did work out. Rudy Gobert was drafted #27 and without him we can't even think about winning. But you can't rely on anecdotes to make decisions. You will always find a counterexample. You may think of Robert Covington as fail, but the Bucks just moved a conditional first for PJ Tucker and they probably don't win the title without him. Trading first isn't good or bad on it's own, it depends on the player you get and the context you're bringing him into.

You can either make the pick, trade it now, punt it back and trade it later, or punt it back and select. All are reasonable options depending on how you the many confounding variables. If were to go with one of the latter option I don't see it as a sign of cowardice. Having a pick in hand to trade could be handy.

I'm clearly not explaining this well... if a GM says there aren't prospects at #30 I like... but every year there are nba players drafted at or after #30 that become something... then they may either be scared or not diving deep enough to find something "good enough" to draft.

If you are DL and trade the #35th pick for a future pick because you didn't like what was left on the board... and then 5 nba players are drafted in the next 12 or so picks... and one of them is the mvp of the league... then you are either scared or not great at identifying nba talent. The draft is unpredictable... so take the best shot at getting lucky. Deferring to next year leaves you about the same chances of landing a pick as this year... no matter how you feel about the players available.

I think we are at a critical time right now. Landing a good young player at this point would be a huge boost to our chances at extending our window and keeping Donovan around. Chances are slim... this draft has just as good a chance as another draft in the future. If we think there is a trade out there then maybe you get that future first... but it would be a win now short term move. Not sure we have the trade fodder to get something using just that firs and one of our rotation players.

Picks are like cash to me... are there reasons to save cash? for sure. If you have a ton of excess cash (like OKC with picks) you may not find enough good investments so kicking the can down the road a little is fine. So do we hold cash right now? What is the meaningful change to the market that we are waiting for? Or do we take a chance on a stock that may help us retire? We are also cash poor so maybe getting a little savings makes sense. If I took some cash to my investment guy and he said "les just stay in cash here" he had better have a good reason why. If the market got 10% like it normally does I'd have some issues.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

So apparently Bledsoe won’t be staying in Memphis and will be on the move again. And Memphis is trying to move up again from 10. Givony said Memphis worked out Moody privately in LA in anticipation of their moves. Also interview Bouknight and Kuminga. I assume pick 7 is the most available pick in that range?

I think 8 would be available too.