Official 2019 Draft thread

[REHawksFan]

5 minutes ago, JTB said:

Agreed I think we should keep 5,8,10 if we are able to get that 

At this point, I just think if they want 3 picks, they should keep 8/10/17 and take two wings and a big at 17.  Unless they can trade up to get a specific target they love, I don't see the need to give the Cavs their 1st next year back just to get to 5.  Since this scenario assumes Culver is off the board at 4, who is worth trading up to 5 for?  

 

 

[Eddielives]

2 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

At this point, I just think if they want 3 picks, they should keep 8/10/17 and take two wings and a big at 17.  Unless they can trade up to get a specific target they love, I don't see the need to give the Cavs their 1st next year back just to get to 5.  Since this scenario assumes Culver is off the board at 4, who is worth trading up to 5 for?  

 

 

Exactly. No sense makes does this. 

[NBASupes]

3 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

At this point, I just think if they want 3 picks, they should keep 8/10/17 and take two wings and a big at 17.  Unless they can trade up to get a specific target they love, I don't see the need to give the Cavs their 1st next year back just to get to 5.  Since this scenario assumes Culver is off the board at 4, who is worth trading up to 5 for?  

 

 

Reddish or Little but they could be available at #8. 

[REHawksFan]

1 minute ago, NBASupes said:

Reddish or Little but they could be available at #8. 

That's what I mean.  Why give up a future pick (or give Cavs their pick back) just to take a player you could get at your current spot. Not good sense so I'd guess the Hawks aren't interested in that deal unless there's a player they don't think will be there (ie unless phx or chi trade out and they fear someone trades up to get Cam). 

[txsting]

Are you saying CLE wants Culver for themselves at 5?  If that's true it sucks.  I wouldn't want to move up to 5 for anyone in that case.  I'd rather stick and take what falls to me.

[gurpilo]

I really think we can have Cam Reddish, Sekou Doumbouya and Fernando if we keep the picks. We could even trade 2nds for #21 and end wih Bol or both Kabs and Bruno.

All this trade scenarios do not improve this situation, we lose assets to draft players on the same tier on positions we already have starters while SF and C remain a big holes. These players do not fit our system and our core while the Cam, Sekou, Bruno package fit perfectly our team, it has no sense.

if we keep the picks

Trae/FA

Huerter/Crabbe

Reddish/Bembry/Doumbouya

Collins/Spellman/Doumbouya

Len /Bruno Fernando

if we do this trade, assuming is #8 and #17 for 5, much worse team

Trae/FA

Huerter/Culver/Crabbe

Bembry/Little or Doumbouya??

Collins/Spellman

Len/?

 

[JTB]

11 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

At this point, I just think if they want 3 picks, they should keep 8/10/17 and take two wings and a big at 17.  Unless they can trade up to get a specific target they love, I don't see the need to give the Cavs their 1st next year back just to get to 5.  Since this scenario assumes Culver is off the board at 4, who is worth trading up to 5 for?  

 

 

Yup which why I think if schlenk accepts this deal then he knows for sure the lakers and or pelicans aren’t interested in signing culver. That’s the only thing that makes sense to me if we move up.

[JTB]

1 minute ago, gurpilo said:

I really think we can have Cam Reddish, Sekou Doumbouya and Fernando if we keep the picks. We could even trade 2nds for #21 and end wih Bol or both Kabs and Bruno.

All this trade scenarios do not improve this situation, we lose assets to draft players on the same tier on positions we already have starters while SF and C remain a big holes. These players do not fit our system and our core while the Cam, Sekou, Bruno package fit perfectly our team, it has no sense.

if we keep the picks

Trae/FA

Huerter/Crabbe

Reddish/Bembry/Doumbouya

Collins/Spellman/Doumbouya

Len /Bruno Fernando

if we do this trade, assuming is #8 and #17 for 5, much worse team

Trae/FA

Huerter/Culver/Crabbe

Bembry/Little or Doumbouya??

Collins/Spellman

Len/?

 

The scenario never included 8. If we make any trade to move up it will be 10 and 17 more than likely.

 

[NBASupes]

1 minute ago, JTB said:

Yup which why I think if schlenk accepts this deal then he knows for sure the lakers and or pelicans aren’t interested in signing culver. That’s the only thing that makes sense to me if we move up.

Deals are general contingent. My guess is if Culver is their pick, they are likely stuck at #5. I think they don't want to do it but I wouldn't be shocked if Bol Bol is their pick. 

[JTB]

1 minute ago, NBASupes said:

Deals are general contingent. My guess is if Culver is their pick, they are likely stuck at #5. I think they don't want to do it but I wouldn't be shocked if Bol Bol is their pick. 

Despite the injuries I love Bol Bol myself but I understand why people see the major risk factor in him. So you think even if culver is on the board at 5 they’d pick Bol Bol ?

maybe I’m reading it wrong but if not that’s crazy

Just now, JTB said:

Despite the injuries I love Bol Bol myself but I understand why people see the major risk factor in him. So you think even if culver is on the board at 5 they’d pick Bol Bol ?

maybe I’m reading it wrong but if not that’s crazy

They as in the Cavs 

[gurpilo]

hace 10 minutos, JTB dijo:

The scenario never included 8. If we make any trade to move up it will be 10 and 17 more than likely.

 

Ummm they were talking first about 8 and 10, after that it was 8 and 17, I don't know they would accept 10 and 17.

Funny thing here is that seems the motivation for Cleveland to move back is to take Reddish at #8, they consider Reddish at 5 a reach. It would be really stupid for the Hawks to give a first to move up to take a player that does not fit your team while the team you are trading with take the player that fits best  your team with your pick and still have another one from you. I would be so pissed!!!!

[Thomas]

If it ends up being with the Cavs am thinking getting that protection off of the 2020 first is a very big deal and a large part of the purpose of the trade, not just improving our options with our first pick. Still need a pick for our future center in there somewhere so hoping it ends up with what we have been figuring anyway. Two wings and a center and am pretty confident Travis is thinking that too. Just no clue how he chooses to get there considering all these info options going on.

[JTB]

2 minutes ago, Thomas said:

If it ends up being with the Cavs am thinking getting that protection off of the 2020 first is a very big deal and a large part of the purpose of the trade, not just improving our options with our first pick. Still need a pick for our future center in there somewhere so hoping it ends up with what we have been hoping anyway. Two wings and a center and am pretty confident Travis is thinking that too. Just no clue how he chooses to get there considering all these info options going on.

I’m starting to think we need to stand pat too cause it’s more important to get two wings and a center then moving up for Culver alone.

UNLESS schlenk and staff are so high on culver they see him as a sure star in Atlanta, if that’s the case then by all means go get your guy I say.

[NBASupes]

18 minutes ago, JTB said:

Despite the injuries I love Bol Bol myself but I understand why people see the major risk factor in him. So you think even if culver is on the board at 5 they’d pick Bol Bol ?

maybe I’m reading it wrong but if not that’s crazy

They as in the Cavs 

They really like Bol. 

I been told they cooled on Cam. Cam not giving them the medical records and Hunter not willing to workout with anyone. There seems to be a believe by Hunter camp that his tape and track record speaks for itself. I really think Culver is their only piece. #4 which isn't that valuable goes up with Culver because teams want that type of player. If Cleveland losses the access of Jarrett, the pick loses it's steam.

[Thomas]

1 minute ago, JTB said:

I’m starting to think we need to stand pat too cause it’s more important to get two wings and a center then moving up for Culver alone.

UNLESS schlenk and staff are so high on culver they see him as a sure star in Atlanta, if that’s the case then by all means go get your guy I say.

So we are talking about the so called poor mans Derozan right?

[JTB]

9 minutes ago, gurpilo said:

Ummm they were talking first about 8 and 10, after that it was 8 and 17, I don't know they would accept 10 and 17.

Funny thing here is that seems the motivation for Cleveland to move back is to take Reddish at #8, they consider Reddish at 5 a reach. It would be really stupid for the Hawks to give a first to move up to take a player that does not fit your team while the team you are trading with take the player that fits best  your team with your pick and still have another one from you. I would be so pissed!!!!

To each his own ! .....I personally don’t think Reddish is that much a better fit than culver. Pretty equal to me with Reddish having more size and culver being more crafty in terms of footwork and better passing ability and knows how to use the screen better.

[JTB]

1 minute ago, Thomas said:

So we are talking about the so called poor mans Derozan right?

I don’t see him as a poor mans DeRozan. I think RJ fits that bill better than Culver 

[NBASupes]

6 minutes ago, JTB said:

To each his own ! .....I personally don’t think Reddish is that much a better fit than culver. Pretty equal to me with Reddish having more size and culver being more crafty in terms of footwork and better passing ability and knows how to use the screen better.

How? I wanna hear this?

[JTB]

18 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

How? I wanna hear this?

Nothing to hear, I’m not looking for a debate... I think both culver and Reddish are good solid fits for this hawks team. Each bring something different but I think what Culver brings could be more worthwhile in the long run.

Culver is a very crafty player that got the advantage to show off his abilities and not have to play behind a ball hog in RJ and a beast of a player in Zion. I’m not saying I don’t want Reddish, I’m saying if the rumors are true and culver is that high on the hawks board I understand it and I’m all for it.

i trust schlenk judgement so if he’s willing  moving up for Culver in a blink of an eye it’s for great reasoning not just good and it signals that schlenk and staff are higher on culver than Reddish as well

-incredible footwork for his age

-great defender

-knows what to do with screens

-very patient 

-good high arching shot

-very good passer

[NBASupes]

2 minutes ago, JTB said:

Nothing to hear, I’m not looking for a debate... I think both culver and Reddish are good solid fits for this hawks team. Each bring something different but I think what Culver brings could be more worthwhile in the long run.

Culver is a very crafty player that got the advantage to show off his abilities and not have to play behind a ball hog in RJ and a beast of a player in Zion. I’m not saying I don’t want Reddish, I’m saying if the rumors are true and culver is that high on the hawks board I understand it and I’m all for it.

i trust schlenk judgement so if he’s willing  moving up for Culver in a blink of an eye it’s for great reasoning not just good and it signals that schlenk and staff are higher on culver than Reddish as well

-incredible footwork for his age

-great defender

-knows what to do with screens

-very patient 

-good high arching shot

-very good passer

There is zero message to state Atlanta sees Jarrett as more valuable than Cam.

You said there is no need for a debate but you shit on Cam, say Travis rates him higher than we have no proof of, and you point your self described strengths you feel he has and then say no need to debate. There is a lot to debate in my eyes. There is no chance in hell Culver is better for us than Cam.