share

How shallow or deep is this draft?

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
How shallow or deep is this draft?

I have been wondering how this draft is going to look past about pick 15, since my Bulls have the 16th and 26th pick. How important is pick 5,6,7, or 8? In a draft like this, would something like a 16th, 26th, and a Kirk Hinrich move you up to the 6th pick? How about throwing in a 2010 first rounder? I feel that if Jordan Hill were to fall like ESPN says, that 6th pick could be had.

What do you guys think? I wish it were like the NFL, where there is a draft points system, but it's not that simple. It varies so much from one year to the next.


Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
Or better yet...

What would a 16th and 26th pick net you by itself, the 12th? Maybe the 9th? Then, you have the 9th and Hinrich for the 6th...I guess I wish I could try and assign a value to the draft slots, which is probably silly until draft day plays out. I mean, if Rubio fell to 6th or something, that 6th pick is worth a lot! (And yes, that's possible with the way his agent is trying to dictate his draft position!)

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 12017
Points: 12121
Offline
you must...

not like Hinrich much. I would'nt package him with the 9th pick to move up just 3 spots to number 6. Hinrich is gonna be an important piece for the Bulls next year with Gordon most likely leaving.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 12017
Points: 12121
Offline
masrock

No one is suggesting that Hinrich alone would get the #6 pick. He is suggesting that Hinrich with the 16th and 26th or with the 9th pick could move the Bulls up to number 6.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
It's not that I don't like Hinrich

I actually think he's a legit starter in this league (although there seems to be just an unbelievable amount of PGs entering the league). I just think that Tyrus Thomas, Joakim Noah, and Kirk Hinrich are the only real chips that the Bulls have, not including salary dumps (like Jerome James and Tim Thomas). Tyrus Thomas would probably be part of a deal for a forward like Amare or Bosh, whom I think will not get their teams' market value, but at least PHX and TOR will get something for them before the "Great League Mix-Up" of 2010 when they will very conceivably walk. Plus, if a guy like Jordan Hill is there you would want him in the rotation with Noah and Thomas, since they have very little offensive output. Plus, I think that the Wolves were trying to get Hinrich last year, weren't they? Plus, it would give him a chance to start again. It does suck for Kirk that after he signed that big deal the Bulls drafted the only PURE PG #1 in the draft in 30 years (since Magic, not counting Iverson who is really a SG) after getting lucky with the 1.7% chance. I don't know, it seems like there could be a few teams in that 6 - 12 range who would rather trade the picks until next years draft so they aren't stuck with more salary before the 2010 offseason. Maybe not, I might be smoking something. I guess we'll find out in about a month.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
What will 16 and 26 get in this draft?

Will 16 and 26 even equal 8,9,10? Or, would 12 be more realistic? I don't know the difference in salary between the different slots, so that could be a big factor. Plus, if you trade a 2009 pick for a 2010 pick, would that be beneficial for the 2010 offseason (salary cap space wise)? Or, is adding a rookie for 2009-2010 in the 6 slot not going to make a difference?

johneco
Registered User
Joined: 05/11/2009
Posts: 127
Points: 41
Offline
I think this draft gets

I think this draft gets pretty sketchy after about 20 - like I would say 20 in this draft is equal to 30 in most drafts.

But I'm curious, why would you want Jordan Hill so much, if you already have Thomas and Noah?

bflaa2
bflaa2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/03/2008
Posts: 139
Points: 60
Offline
I think because.....

The Bulls dont really have a force inside. Jordan Hill is a year or two could emerge into that dominate inside force. Hill also provides offensive potential where Joakim doesnt and Tyrus still has a alot of potential not really proven yet.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
Yes, what bflaa2 said...

The Bulls have needed some scoring inside since Elton Brand, and maybe Eddy Curry. We had Aldridge and traded him away, and I don't think that Tyrus Thomas is going to be that great of a scorer. I think that in the right offense, he could do some damage, but he isn't going to be with the Bulls in 2 years. He's gone, in my opinion. Although in one of my mocks, I have Hill falling to 9 so I am not really in love with him though (since I don't think that Kevin McHale is going to draft Hill at 6). He is the 2nd best PF in the draft and he has more offensive potential than either Noah or Thomas. That was pretty evident against the Celtics, could you imagine if we had someone on the blocks who could score? That opens up lanes for Rose, Salmons, etc. especially if someone down there could draw some fouls. It is really the only person I could see the Bulls really making a move for, unless they go after Blair, whom I would like for his offensive rebounding but wouldn't score much either.

tkd720man
Registered User
Joined: 03/31/2009
Posts: 41
Points: 12
Offline
To answer the original

To answer the original question more generally, I think this draft is deeper than people are giving it credit for.

The lottery looks solid. Griffin and Rubio will obviously be studs. Hill, Thabeet, and Clark all look like hit-or-miss types, but the guards all look good - they'll all make it to one degree or another, it's just a question of how good they'll be (with the exception of Derozan and Ellington, who could be busts, but for different reasons). I would be willing to bet that there are fewer busts here than in an average year.

15-22 is where the most risk is at in this draft, with Johnson, Teague, Lawal, Mullens, and Blair presenting the most question marks. The risk-reward is high, but no better or worse than usual in this range. The bust-to-success ratio here should be average.

It's not stocked with star talent, but the late first round is going to produce far fewer busts than most drafts. Guys like Sam Young, Hansbrough, Terrence Williams, Jeff Adrien, Darren Collison, etc - they're all tough, seasoned players who will stick around the league for a long time as role players. Some people might not consider these traits as signals of "depth," but I certainly do.

To put it bluntly, It's a reasonably safe bet that 5 years from now, the Bulls will have gotten more mileage out of their 26th pick than their 16th.

leppy
Registered User
Joined: 05/08/2009
Posts: 214
Points: 89
Offline
draft

i think this draft is very deep on quality players but has very little superstar potentials. there will be some stars in this draft not superstars. griffin, thabeet are the only ones who have superstar potential and i dont think thabeet will get there offensively. i dont like trading up in this draft.

leppy
Registered User
Joined: 05/08/2009
Posts: 214
Points: 89
Offline
more importantly the bulls

the bulls have no need to trade up. they are gearing up for the 2010 season. they can pick up a few good players at the spots they are at. its time to get some role players for the big season. hinrich is a perfect role player with a declining contract and he can backup both guard positions. he was 2nd team all defense and people seem to forget that. he did a better job at guarding pierce than salmons and his only 28 years old which means he is in his prime. he also struggled with a fluke injury to his shooting thumb and teaches rose better than any rookie pg will. dont trade him unless you are getting what hes worth. plus dont just trade him so you can get bosh a year earlier. be patient and wait. at 16 they should take either

a. dejuan blair. his 7'3'' wingspan is around 3'' longer than the average long-armed pf essentially making him taller. he plays more like 6'9'' than 6'6''. he dominated thabeet who is suppose to be the best post defender in the draft and the main reason thabeet will be effective in the nba is his defense. blair is 280lbs and can plow through defenders to get to the hoop. he's a great rebounder and can eat up misses on drives from the bulls guards. the only reason blair has bust potential is his weight issue. if he can control that he will be a very good player.

b. james johnson. they need a backup sf and an insurancy policy to deng who has missed significant time the past two years. drafting him allows you to package tyrus thomas(who thinks he's better than he is and will never accept that he is a role player) and luol deng who is borderline injury prone. salmons struggled guarding the 3 and is better suited to guard the 2. johnson could be a very good backup and possible replacement to deng. he's the best sf available around this time.

c.chase budinger. he would be the next best sf around at this time. they should take him for all the reasons above. possibly if you dont think budinger is going to pan out you could package players/picks for johnson,blair, or maybe derozen or hill. im not sold on budinger and dont have as much faith as i do in johnson to replace deng.

i'm all for luol deng if he stays healthy. i just dont know if he can do it. this season will be telling. at 26 they should take.
either terrence williams, sam young, or hansbrough. williams and young can be quality role players and depth to the wing. even if we take a sf at 16 we could still take on of these guys. they are more combo g/f anyways at 6'6'' each. hansbrough will be a very good role player. he hustles, knocks down shots, and gets dirty. those are role player attributes and you are only going to get role players at this pick. they would need a backup pf if they dont get blair. he can set the pick and pop and is a smart player who plays with passion. y anybody would not want him on there team is beyond me.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
Trading Up Does Make Sense

I disagree with you here. I think that the Bulls should trade up. Right now, they DO NOT have that solid of a core. What I mean by that, is:

A. SHOOTING GUARD: Gordon probably won't resign, although I think that's a blessing in disguise. I really don't know how the Bulls would replace his instant offense. I do know how they can replace his disgusting defense, by playing someone else who will try to fight through screens and is taller than 6'1'' (Gordon is shorter than Rose by a couple inches). I don't think that Gordon is a starting 2 guard on an NBA Championship team, but if we do resign him to a REASONABLE contract, instant offense will be easier to trade (especially in today's NBA where contacts are moved more than players).
You then have Salmons starting at the 2, whom I really like, but it means you have a 30 year old shooting guard who just came off of a career year, and his contract will be up after the season. By 2010, you could have both guys gone, which leaves Hinrich and Rose as the only guards that WILL be on the team in 2010 for sure (barring a trade from Paxson/Heard).

B. POWER FORWARD/CENTER: Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah: Neither is a legitimate scoring threat down in the post. Both are transition scorers and defensive standouts. Tyrus Thomas has been on the trading block since he was drafted (actually since he was traded the first time) it seems and I don't personally believe he will be anything close to the Shawn Marion type that this website compared him too. I think that he will be more like a Kenyon Martin, but without the toughness and basketball IQ that Martin has. Noah showed that he was the kind of guy that you can win with in the NBA. If you add a Amare or Bosh to the mix, you will definitely be pleased with what Noah will give you next to either of those guys. He is a legit center in the league who is athletic and hustles, but his offense might not ever be a facet of the Bulls offense. The Bulls need someone down low who can score, and I don't think that either of these guys can post-up and make the opposing teams' centers work, allowing the lanes to be open for a guy like Rose to drive. In the playoffs, Perkins and Davis didn't have to worry about staying with their man when someone would drive and that really hurts what the Bulls could do with Rose.

(This is why I am so high on Jordan Hill, even though I don't really know what he will turn out to be. You can't tell me that he wouldn't at least add an offensive component to the post that the Bulls don't currently have and at the very least a very good bargaining chip in a potential trade)

C. SMALL FORWARD - Luol Deng: I am also high on Deng. I feel that he could be a great player in the NBA, which is a league that focuses on match-ups and the problems that certain match-ups cause. Just look at the current Orlando-Cleveland series for proof (Doug Collins mentions that every game he announces as well). He is a legit 6'9'', with long arms and guard-like speed/skills. He also can hit a mid-range jumper, which seems to be a rarity in the NBA as of late. He also is perfectly inclined to be able to run the floor and be an excellent compliment to Derrick Rose. The problem is that he is hurt ALL THE TIME. If he gets injured again, his contract becomes almost unmovable. Plus, who knows what kind of development he will have since he hasn't been able to really work on much of his game AND he might lose some of his athleticism because of all the injuries.

So all in all, I feel that there are A LOT of question marks with this Bulls team. Like every other contending team in the East from the last few years: Cleveland, Miami, Toronto, Orlando, Boston (Not Detroit, who has been a contender) they have drafted their Superstar and will now dramatically alter the roster to fit his game and needs through either trades (Boston), free agency (Orlando), the draft (Toronto) or a combo of all 3. I see the Bulls' core as being Rose, Deng, and Noah going forward. If any of the other guys on the roster are still there in 3 seasons, except possibly Salmons and Aaron Gray, I will be VERY surprised.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
Hinrich

I agree, I really like Hinrich as well. The problem is that he has a great contract that will be an asset in and of itself, not even talking about how much he can bring to almost every team in the league as a player. He is a great bargaining chip and I also think that Paxson will try to move him so that he can be a starting PG somewhere in the league (silly I know, but Paxson seems to be that kind of guy). I don't want him to leave, if we are sure we can add to top-tier free agents in 2010 then I don't want to move him, but it makes me nervous to go into 2010 hoping (just like almost every other NBA team) that we will be able to lure in the big name free agents. If we can't, for whatever reason, then we might be screwed. Plus, if we trade for Bosh this season (2009-2010), we can offer him more money than anyone else in the league b/c of the Bird rule (I think that's what it is called). When you are talking max contracts, that is a lot of money. I know that this is all common knowledge, but Paxson only seems to draft players that have been to the Final Four as well. Seriously, look it up. All the players that we drafted that have been contributors (besides Thabo and Aaron Gray was in the Sweet 16) had been to a final four. So that eliminates Budinger and Hill. Quite a few others in this draft as well. I know that Gar Heard is the new GM, but I think that it's basically the same "regime" as it's been since 2003 when Pax took over.

leppy
Registered User
Joined: 05/08/2009
Posts: 214
Points: 89
Offline
pretty good for the most part

i like noah a lot tho. he can score, hustle and is a good defender. thomas is a head case and thinks he is better than marion right now. noah can be the 2nd big man to when bosh or amare comes. dejuan blair can still be in this mix coming off the bench. noah and bosh arent legit centers but both can guard those spots.

i def think you can trade deng before he becomes a def injury prone player. i like deng and thomas and the 26 for bosh or amare. that means we have to get a sf back in the trade and/or 16 pick tho.

or thomas and 16 for hill wouldnt be that bad but the reason i dont want to trade up for hill is because we need a backup sf and it could be answered with the 16 pick. maybe the 26th pick and thomas for hill would be a good trade and worth doing. i just dont think there are many players worthy of trading up for. but hill is one i do think some team will trade up for because of the lack of big men in this draft. the bulls could take a couple role players in this draft but unless it means dumping thomas to trade from 26 to hill. i dont want to trade up.

i think salmons is signed for the next two seasons but he may have an opt out after the next one. he is a great sg to have for the next two seasons. he is in his prime now. the 26th pick could answer the replacement with terrence williams or sam young. they both can be starting sg's after two years backing up. and maybe sign somebody once salmons contract is up

and no just because paxson has drafted final four players most of the time doesnt eliminate possible players from being drafted. he hasnt made that many picks to say that.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
I am with you

I agree with pretty much everything that you are saying here. I actually think that the Bulls should trade Deng and Thomas to Phoenix, they should trade Amare to Toronto (where he can be with Marion and Colangelo can implement a Phoenix like team) and Bosh should come to Chicago. I think that there's a snowballs chance in hell of Amare staying in Phoenix, and I think that Bosh will be moved if Toronto doesn't feel that resigning is a possibility. Of course, Deng had an off year and has a big contract so that might actually hinder a deal opposed to helping it. Phoenix is said to like both Deng and Thomas though (which is funny because the Bulls took Deng with Phoenix's pick).

As far as the draft goes though, I know that it's silly to say, "Paxson won't take someone who hasn't been in the Final Four", but he takes successful college players from successful college programs. He doesn't seem to take many projects, and if he does, they were major contributors on successful college teams (like Tyrus Thomas). Starting with his first pick, which was dramatically altered by Jay Williams hurting himself a week before the 2003 Draft, his first -

2003 - Kirk Hinrich (Kansas, Championship Game)
2004 - Ben Gordon (Connecticut, National Championship)
2004 - Chris Duhon (Duke University, Championship Game)
2004 - Luol Deng (Duke University, Final Four)
2006 - Tyrus Thomas (LSU, Final Four)
2006 - Aaron Gray (Pittsburgh, Sweet 16)
2007 - Joakim Noah (Florida, 2 National Championships)
2008 - Derrick Rose (Memphis, National Championship)

And if you eliminate Aaron Gray, whom was still on the team for the 2008-2009 playoff team but didn't play more than a few garbage minutes, you have all significant contributing draft picks for 5 straight years that were Final Four or better. That doesn't include players that didn't make the roster in the second round, like JamesOn Curry, because those late second rounders don't get the same attention and those players didn't contribute. Also, Thabo Sefalosha was a foreign player. I mean, that's a pretty significant pattern. Like, in 2007, while watching the draft the analysts were saying that the Bulls might take Spencer Hawes and I knew that they would take Joakim Noah because of his success in college. When there was a "debate" over Rose or Beasley (which was kind of a debate since PGs aren't taken 1st but once every quarter of a century) I knew that Rose's success on the national stage would be a HUGE factor in the Bulls' decision making. Of course, I am pretty CERTAIN that "With the 26th pick in the 2009 NBA Draft, the Chicago Bulls select...Tyler Hansborough" will be said by Stern if the Bulls hold onto that pick next month. I am not saying that's a bad choice for the team, it's just my personal preference that the Bulls pick someone with a bit more upside. I could be an idiot though and he could be the next Carols Boozer who slips late in the draft and turns into a star.

Born2Ball1986
Born2Ball1986's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/26/2009
Posts: 6
Points: 3
Offline
Bulls

I would see wut i could get for Gordon first because even though his shot selection sucks when he gets going he can flat out fill it up. Hinrich is not worth a top ten pick he's a average point guard at best. I would draft BJ Mullens becuz people dont know how much he wus held back at Ohio St. Thad Matta tried to turn him in2 a tradtional back 2 tha basket type player like Oden but Mullens is versatile an can also shoot the ball. Mullens paired with Ty Thomas could be a really good front court seeing that Thomas is also still developing. I think Noah is garbage an is just good 4 a show with his chest beating and trash talking all 4 getting a dunk which will end up his only bucket of the game. They should resign Salmons who paired with Deng is a legit pair of wings 2 surround your center piece Derrick Rose with. The bulls should try 2 get sum veteran depth 2 mix with their young talent. Jordan Hill however is not the answer for the bulls. They need a scoring big 2 put them over the top.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
I think I get what you are saying...but

I don't know what you mean by see what I could get for Gordon. He is an unrestricted free agent, so I don't think that we will get anything for him unless there is a sign and trade which I don't see happening. Here is my problem with your thoughts on Mullens, and why I also disagree with you on Noah. Let me get this straight, I don't LOVE Noah. But, I think that Paxson saw that Noah produced on the biggest stage a college player could perform on and he has produced the same stuff to the Bulls as he did at Florida. He hustles, gets double digit rebounds, and can guard the opposing team's center in the block and then beat him down the court on a fast break. That is a match-up problem for other teams. How could BJ Mullens with all of that talent not do ANYTHING at Ohio State? I get what you are saying about BJ not getting used correctly but with his physical gifts he should have been able to manhandle most of the Big 10 centers he went up against. I mean, I think that he has more talent than Noah offensively in his big toe (and if you have ever seen Joakim shoot you will probably agree) but I would bet my lucky shorts that he doesn't come close to the double-double that Noah can give every night. Paxson and the Bulls scouting staff doesn't like guys that have trouble succeeding and I can see why. There are a lot of busts who never produced anything but had all the physical tools. I believe that there are less busts the other way around, as long as those guys aren't physically limited in the pros like Tyus Edney or something. Like Psycho T for example, I don't think that anyone will ever call him a bust. Morrison and Reddick maybe, but Morrison might as well be Steve Novak from Marquette. Also, I'm not sure if you mean we should resign Salmons in a couple of years when his contract is up or not, because he will be with the team until at least the end of the 2009-2010 season. Oh, and Jordan Hill I thought was supposed to be a PF who could put some points on the board? Or am I wrong? I don't know that much about him other than what is on this site and draftexpress.com. He looks like a guy who works his butt off though. I don't know why Mullens didn't stay at Ohio State anyway, Thad Motta must require all of his freshman centers to leave after one year whether they are ready or not. Mullens should have learned to be a back to the basket center whether he thought it suited him or not. The fact is, he has the tools to do it and it is the rarest commodity in the NBA. There are a hundred 6'10'' guys in the NBA who can shoot 3's now, but a pure 7'0'' center who can bang in the block and has great hands and footwork? That is what makes GM's and scouts drool!

That's why the Trailblazers never really considered Durant at 1, even though he is a stud. It's why the Clippers took Kandi #1, Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, Pau Gasol, and Eddie Curry went 1,2,3,4 in 2002. There will be a dozen other tall, lanky busts in the next decade at the top of the draft too. That is the one thing that you can't teach, soft hands, good footwork, and the ability to be 7'0''+ and at least 260 pounds.

Meditated States
Meditated States's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/29/2009
Posts: 2869
Points: 614
Offline
Very deep

I think you can get some quality players in this draft all the way to the last pick. I also think there are some major bust coming after Griffin too.

nepaliman_7
Registered User
Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 103
Points: 61
Offline
what do you men rose is the

what do you men rose is the best pure point guard in 30 years? heard of chris paul, deron williams, john stockton, steve nash, jason kidd, isaiah thomas?

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 541
Points: 330
Offline
I didn't say Rose was the best PG

I said that he was the only pure PG drafted number 1 in the draft in the last 30 years. I am counting Allen Iverson as a SG, not a pure point guard. I am also calling Magic a pure point guard, which some debate as well, but I don't. Unless I missed something, and those guys I HAVE heard of named Chris Paul, Deron Williams, John Stockton, Steve Nash, Jason Kidd, and Isaiah Thomas went #1 in the draft then what I said makes sense. Unless you can show me where I said Rose was the BEST PG in 30 years, which I didn't say.

QHaynes123
Registered User
Joined: 04/03/2009
Posts: 814
Points: -173
Offline
no way

Noo chance in the world..i'd trade Hinrich for the 6th pick straight up...if i were minnesota...i'd spit on john paxson if he called with that offer...

Read and Post on Mock draft 3.5

RSS: Syndicate content