Which Team Are You For the Third Pick?

[PhoSita]

Team Trade the Pick. 

Get someone established in there.  (Just not Okafor)

So, my challenge for the Team Trade the Pick folks is, for whom?  You can kinda see it in the biased way I phrased the poll option -- I think it's really easy to say, "Oh I don't like the draft, none of these guys can help us for the next few years, just trade for somebody who's already good." 

It's much harder to figure out a realistic explanation for what that would look like.  Because you know, teams with players that are already good tend to feel the same way about the draft.  Why trade this really good player -- Butler, Cousins, George, Etc -- for a draft pick or three? 

Most of the time, established guys who get traded are either on the back end of their prime, or only have a single season left on their contract.  Tough to justify trading a top 3 selection for a player who fits in either category.

[PhoSita]

Just remember that we are trying to get the best asset out of this 3rd pick.
If we bring in Okafur it isn't necessarily because he's the player of the future for us, it means that Danny can use him better than anything else he can get in this draft to get a star player here.
eg if Blake Griffin or some other top 10 guys becomes available, then Okafur has the best foundation for Brad/Danny to work with and develop into that major trade chip like Big AL.

He's not just thinking about who will be the best player for us (although that's certainly a part of it, it's not the whole equation).

That's a risky way to look at team-building.  It only works if Okafor is good/develops.  If he continues to stagnate, he will lose value every year.  Last year he had more value than Porzingis in trade, this year he does not, etc.  Plus, you have to build a real team and play real games while waiting for this final cure-all trade, which may or may not exist.  I think you have to take players that you like and that you like for YOUR team and trust your judgment.  If you end up selecting players based on what you think the rest of the league will most value, you are going to run into trouble sooner rather than later.  Case in point: Sixers.  They have a team that doesn't work well together.  They are stunting the development of their best players, and now they are totally reliant on third parties to bail them out.

Maybe it is, but it's clear now that this is Danny's philosophy.  Target the best assets.  Okafor makes a lot of sense as a buy-low.  I think it's very likely his trade value won't be lower than this throug at least the end of his rookie deal, if not the length of the contract after that.

And hey, that philosophy got us Isaiah Thomas.  And also David Lee.

[mef730]

We need to sticky this thread so that, three years from now, when people are saying, "Danny sucks at drafting! He picked Player X when Player Y was available!," we can look back and see what we were saying about Players X vs Y at the time. Just for fun, of course.

Mike

[Csfan1984]

I'd trade the pick Hunter and Rozier to Bucks for Parker. Bender maybe better for them next to Monroe. Rozier would get back up PG duties right away. Hunter also a shooter off the bench potentially.

[PhoSita]

Someone convince me that there is any merit to trading for Okafor after the year he just had.  Also, if we do trade for Okafor, there is no way we should have to add anything to the #3 pick.

I think Okafor definitely has some talent (and I did like him as an offensive player out of Duke) but in the past year he has shown the following:
1) Poor professionalism.
2) Poor maturity.
3) Poor overall defense and "rim protection".
4) Poor rebounding.
5) Regression in passing skills (or at least an inability to recognize that his passing is one of the skills that made him so effective -- which reinforces 1 and 2 on this list).

So right now he is a good post scorer that is below average at everything else.  You would literally need the perfect 4 to play next to him.  A player that is athletic/mobile enough to guard on the perimeter so you don't have two bigs who can't switch, a good 3 point shooter for spacing, a good rebounder, and a good rim protector.  The player I just described basically doesn't exist in the world.  So, explain to me why would use our single best asset to acquire a player who would need Superman next to him to be part of a good team?

Think of it this way ... He went into a situation that was pretty much the perfect storm of terrible for a player of his skill set.  He is not without flaws, obviously, and the Sixers arent a total excuse for what went wrong with Okafors rookie season.  But there's a good chance, I believe, that his trade value after a year or two with the Celtics, provided Stevens can work the kind of magic with Okafor that he used to make Crawford and Turner appear to be valuable team players on a decent team, will be much higher than it is now.

[PhoSita]

I'd trade the pick Hunter and Rozier to Bucks for Parker. Bender maybe better for them next to Monroe. Rozier would get back up PG duties right away. Hunter also a shooter off the bench potentially.

That's actually really interesting. I still doubt the Bucks would consider moving on from Parker so soon, but you're absolutely right that Bender could be awesome next to Giannis, and maybe he could make Monroe work with their core guys, as well.

[Ilikesports17]

I'd trade the pick Hunter and Rozier to Bucks for Parker. Bender maybe better for them next to Monroe. Rozier would get back up PG duties right away. Hunter also a shooter off the bench potentially.

Parker isn't exactly on the block. I would expect AB at least would also have to go if you want to bring in Parker.

[boscel33]

If it's #3 plus a few other small assets for Okafor I'm in. If we stick with the pick I go for Bender

Agree.

[mmmmm]

As soon as Bill ("I'm so pumped we just stole Young at 17") Simmons started hyping the Okafor trade, I knew it was probably a very bad idea.

Team Bender.

TP

[mmmmm]

Bender strikes me more as a very tall SF

Could he be like Rashard Lewis? Has pf/c height but is most likely a 3/ stretch 4?

Rashard Lewis was a terrible defensive player.  The thing that makes Bender interesting is his defense.

[wiley]

I'm a pretty satisfied cat who doesn't mind the slow road (won't be able to catch Cleveland next year).
So patience doesn't bother me.  Which puts me on Team Whatever Danny Decides is Fine.  Only caveat to my patience is that I'm on board with trading for Cousins if the plan is to contend sooner.

But for this thread my team preferences are:

1. Team Clever Danny Trade of the Pick (probably using Dunn or Bender)
2. Team Keep the Pick and Murray
3. Team Keep the Pick and Hield
4. Team Trade up for Ingram if not too costly (one extra pick for example).
5. Team trade for Okafor (only for #3 and no more...Dunn alone may out value Okafor by year 2).
    Dunn will be a frequent double double with triple double threat who leads his team and plays good
    D.

[PhoSita]

Bender strikes me more as a very tall SF

Could he be like Rashard Lewis? Has pf/c height but is most likely a 3/ stretch 4?

Rashard Lewis was a terrible defensive player.  The thing that makes Bender interesting is his defense.

Not that I disagree, but to echo what Stan Van said recently on The Vertical, you gotta give credit to Rashard for buying in as a 4, back when it was much rarer to see wings do that.

Orlando was pretty excellent defensively despite Rashard's shortcomings, which was mostly due to Dwight, but couldn't have worked out without Rashard doing what he could.


Anyway, I agree, Bender is most tantalizing because of the possible defensive versatility afforded by his size.  A player with his offensive profile at the 3 would not really excite as a potential lottery pick.  But imagine that at the 4 or 5, you now have a player who can cover forwards and bigs, stretch the floor to the three point line, and drive on slower defenders. 

Plus he seems to have good passing ability and floor vision, and wants to model his game after guys who were excellent facilitators.  Combine that with the above and you can imagine him as a possible drive and kick option at the 5, which is really exciting (see what Diaw did on the Spurs in 2013-2014).

[Sideshow Mel]

Murray has won me over, so count me in for him. I'd leave the door open for Bender to do the same once he works out, provided he's not working out against folding chairs.

I expect Danny to trade the pick though. Based on his recent successes on the trade market, I'm fine with that even though I'd be initially disappointed to give up the chance to pick one these guys that are being so thoroughly dissected.

[slamtheking]

Team Trade the Pick for a Vet.

not enamored with any of the players as quality third player in this draft.  the prospects in the 3-8 range are fairly equivalent and probably end up decent players but all for using the pick to get an established all-star-quality player or if need be, a better young prospect and another asset (possibly a first for next year's draft instead of one this year).

[Celtics18]

I'm On Team Buddy.  I know this begs the question; "why not go with Murray, then, who is essentially the same player, but three years younger?"

I don't believe that Jamal Murray is simply a younger version of Buddy Hield.  Murray is a really good scorer.  You don't score 20 PPG as a freshman for Kentucky in arguably the toughest conference in college basketball without being a fantastic natural scorer.

What I didn't see from Murray, and what I'm not convinced will translate to the next level, is high level athleticism.  I think Hield has much more NBA level athleticism.  He didn't show it a ton, because he spent so much time raining threes, but there were ample moments where it was clearly on display.

I'm also of the belief that Buddy will keep tightening his handles and continue to improve his driving game at the next level.  I know some will counter with; "but, he's already twenty-two.  He's done improving."

Sometimes late bloomers come around, and Buddy seems to be one.  I am going to hypothesize that growing up in the Virgin Islands slowed his early development more than his continental counterparts (remember another famous Virgin Islander who spent four years in college in the US).

Anyway, by all accounts, his off-the-bounce game was virtually non-existant in his junior year.  He added it for his amazing Player of the Year senior campaign.  He's going to keep working on it, and he'll probably get more space to show it off on the next level.

Some say he's not an "aim high" prospect.  I disagree.  I think he's got the highest upside of anyone outside the top two (possibly overall) in this draft.

Just like Bender, Brown, and Murray, Buddy Hield may never reach his ceiling.  I think it's worth swinging for the fences on him, though.