What's new
By:
Filters

With the 35th Pick... Jarnell Stokes (traded)

LazyD said:
So this was for the better of a Boston or Toronto 2nd round pick? Is that correct, or am I misinformed?
Click to expand...

This has been Tweeted by Locke and Jody now as the Case. Boston could be bad again next year so it could be a good pick.
 
So its for a 2nd rounder next year?? That makes much more sense than 3 2016 2nd rounders.

I liked the value of Jordan Clarkson at 35 but hes redundant with Exum. Id have to say the same about Dinwiddie. Id have probably taken Jerami Grant.

For those who wanted Tavares, as long as that picks in the top 45 next year there will probably be a live bodied 7'er in that range. I think Kaleb Tarcewzski will work himself into the 1st round, DX has him projected in the 2nd, I dont mind A.J. Hammons in that range if he loses some weight.

There could be players like Dakari Johnson or Illimane Diop who fall to the 2nd, One of the players i was talking about in the '13 draftees thread, Mam Jaiteh should be in play in that range. Serbian, Nikola Milutinov is projected in the bottom of the 1st round.

DX has 7'1 Latvian, Andzejs Pasecniks projected 37th his frame looks really big and he appears fairly light on his feet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sp7oMtoq0Ms

for the sake of the 2015 draft thread im psyched, I enjoy looking thru the 2nd rounders with a fine-tooth comb
 
I think the draft were interested in that Brazilian kid that Toronto drafted at 20 with their 35 pick.
 
So basically...

1. Lindsey viewed the 2nd rounder as a "trade-up" chip
2. he didn't end up needing it in this draft
3. so he swapped it for a "trade-up" chip in a future draft when it may come in handy.

And reports that it's for the better of Boston/Toronto's pick means it will still probably be in the top third of the 2nd round.
 
Notes said:
So basically...

1. Lindsey viewed the 2nd rounder as a "trade-up" chip
2. he didn't end up needing it in this draft
3. so he swapped it for a "trade-up" chip in a future draft when it may come in handy.

And reports that it's for the better of Boston/Toronto's pick means it will still probably be in the top third of the 2nd round.
Click to expand...

Yes, Boston's pick likely puts it the 35-40 range. Guess they felt the Euros available weren't worth stashing.
 
PointGod_AlecBurks said:
So its for a 2nd rounder next year?? That makes much more sense than 3 2016 2nd rounders.

I liked the value of Jordan Clarkson at 35 but hes redundant with Exum. Id have to say the same about Dinwiddie. Id have probably taken Jerami Grant.

For those who wanted Tavares, as long as that picks in the top 45 next year there will probably be a live bodied 7'er in that range. I think Kaleb Tarcewzski will work himself into the 1st round, DX has him projected in the 2nd, I dont mind A.J. Hammons in that range if he loses some weight.

There could be players like Dakari Johnson or Illimane Diop who fall to the 2nd, One of the players i was talking about in the '13 draftees thread, Mam Jaiteh should be in play in that range. Serbian, Nikola Milutinov is projected in the bottom of the 1st round.

DX has 7'1 Latvian, Andzejs Pasecniks projected 37th his frame looks really big and he appears fairly light on his feet


for the sake of the 2015 draft thread im psyched, I enjoy looking thru the 2nd rounders with a fine-tooth comb
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that Dakari Johnson is such a bad prospect. He didn't really get a lot of burn due to Kentucky'd depth.
 
So, we will likely have two picks in the 35 to 40 range. Those can trade up to a mid to late 20 pick with a team not wanting guaranteed salary
 
I didn't really understand why the Jazz traded out initially, but the players I would've targeted in a vacuum (Dinwiddie, Clarkson, Tavares), were really redundant with players the Jazz already have. Josh Huestis was also off the board who I was high on.

It feels like the draft unfolded very different than how they thought and didn't have time to arrange a better deal. But, whatever. I get it.
 
Why did everyone want DL to waste a pick on a second rounder he had no faith in when he could can kick the 2nd round trash can down the road and hope something falls into his lap?

I still don't get why so many of you like Bodhi and Colton wanted DL to just throw this pick away.
 
franklin said:
Why did everyone want DL to waste a pick on a second rounder he had no faith in when he could can kick the 2nd round trash can down the road and hope something falls into his lap?

I still don't get why so many of you like Bodhi and Colton wanted DL to just throw this pick away.
Click to expand...
I think that they believe there were good players available.

The name tavares seems to be brought up alot
 
At the time, I thought it was a bad deal because I thought it was for Memphis' own second round pick. If this was the case then it was a bad deal. But it's nice to hear it's the better of either Toronto or Boston's second round pick. I feel better about it now.
 
franklin said:
I still don't get why so many of you like Bodhi and Colton wanted DL to just throw this pick away.
Click to expand...

Not sure which post of mine led you to believe that, but it's not accurate. I'm perfectly fine trading the pick... it's just that the #35 pick in this draft should definitely have been worth more than what will likely be around the #40 or so pick in two years. The #35 pick in this draft should have been at a minimum worth MORE than the #35 pick in two years, because there's an opportunity cost in delaying the pick.
 
colton said:
Not sure which post of mine led you to believe that, but it's not accurate. I'm perfectly fine trading the pick... it's just that the #35 pick in this draft should definitely have been worth more than what will likely be around the #40 or so pick in two years. The #35 pick in this draft should have been at a minimum worth MORE than the #35 pick in two years, because there's an opportunity cost in delaying the pick.
Click to expand...


There isn't really an opportunity cost, cause either way we would be foregoing the players we could have drafted with either pick (this years or 2016's).
 
ljnapoli said:
There isn't really an opportunity cost, cause either way we would be foregoing the players we could have drafted with either pick (this years or 2016's).
Click to expand...

Perhaps "opportunity cost" isn't exactly the right term, but there is definitely a cost associated with it. To wit: if a team does a trade like that every year, they will never ever get the pick. Therefore doing a trade like that costs the team something.
 
colton said:
Not sure which post of mine led you to believe that, but it's not accurate. I'm perfectly fine trading the pick... it's just that the #35 pick in this draft should definitely have been worth more than what will likely be around the #40 or so pick in two years. The #35 pick in this draft should have been at a minimum worth MORE than the #35 pick in two years, because there's an opportunity cost in delaying the pick.
Click to expand...

I get the on paper criticism and wanting more, but again, why should it "have been worth more" if DL didn't have a stasher he saw any value in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top