xavier wrote:

Welpee wrote:You don't draft based on need unless your two highest rated prospects are graded equally. For argument sake, if the Knicks had Toppin rated at 92 and (let's say) Haliburton rated as a 89, you don't go with the lesser rated prospect because you need a point guard. You draft your highest rated prospect even if he plays the same position as your best player.

Minnesota and Golden State didn't draft Ball because they thought Edwards and Wiseman had the more upside and less risk. Whether they were right remains to be seen.

Yes, if we are talking about the very top of the draft, then in principle you choose the best available player. However, after the first 5 picks, you start to take into account how the player fits on the roster, and it is also important which position are we talking about. As I already wrote, two PGs can play together, two wings the same thing. However, two PFs or two Cs no that easy, and Randle and Toppin are both just PFs and can hardly play any other position.

When we add that it is common knowledge that top players play a lot of minutes when Thibs is coaching, it was clear that there is really no room for Toppin next to Randle. It seems to me that FO at the time of the draft was sure that Randle would be traded very quickly and that Toppin would be given much space on PF.

You don't draft for a moment in time and FO's know this. Randle is on a 2 year deal (at time of draft) and had not played well. Best talent was drafted

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

xavier wrote:

Welpee wrote:You don't draft based on need unless your two highest rated prospects are graded equally. For argument sake, if the Knicks had Toppin rated at 92 and (let's say) Haliburton rated as a 89, you don't go with the lesser rated prospect because you need a point guard. You draft your highest rated prospect even if he plays the same position as your best player.

Minnesota and Golden State didn't draft Ball because they thought Edwards and Wiseman had the more upside and less risk. Whether they were right remains to be seen.

Yes, if we are talking about the very top of the draft, then in principle you choose the best available player. However, after the first 5 picks, you start to take into account how the player fits on the roster, and it is also important which position are we talking about. As I already wrote, two PGs can play together, two wings the same thing. However, two PFs or two Cs no that easy, and Randle and Toppin are both just PFs and can hardly play any other position.

When we add that it is common knowledge that top players play a lot of minutes when Thibs is coaching, it was clear that there is really no room for Toppin next to Randle. It seems to me that FO at the time of the draft was sure that Randle would be traded very quickly and that Toppin would be given much space on PF.

You don't draft for a moment in time and FO's know this. Randle is on a 2 year deal (at time of draft) and had not played well. Best talent was drafted

Exactly. Teams who draft that way usually aren't very good and usually end up on the "we should've drafted (fill in the blank)" list. I just don't get why anyone is questioning the pick based on the position he plays. If someone thinks there was a better player available that's a different discussion.

Uptown wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

xavier wrote:

Welpee wrote:You don't draft based on need unless your two highest rated prospects are graded equally. For argument sake, if the Knicks had Toppin rated at 92 and (let's say) Haliburton rated as a 89, you don't go with the lesser rated prospect because you need a point guard. You draft your highest rated prospect even if he plays the same position as your best player.

Minnesota and Golden State didn't draft Ball because they thought Edwards and Wiseman had the more upside and less risk. Whether they were right remains to be seen.

Yes, if we are talking about the very top of the draft, then in principle you choose the best available player. However, after the first 5 picks, you start to take into account how the player fits on the roster, and it is also important which position are we talking about. As I already wrote, two PGs can play together, two wings the same thing. However, two PFs or two Cs no that easy, and Randle and Toppin are both just PFs and can hardly play any other position.

When we add that it is common knowledge that top players play a lot of minutes when Thibs is coaching, it was clear that there is really no room for Toppin next to Randle. It seems to me that FO at the time of the draft was sure that Randle would be traded very quickly and that Toppin would be given much space on PF.

You don't draft for a moment in time and FO's know this. Randle is on a 2 year deal (at time of draft) and had not played well. Best talent was drafted

Exactly. Teams who draft that way usually aren't very good and usually end up on the "we should've drafted (fill in the blank)" list. I just don't get why anyone is questioning the pick based on the position he plays. If someone thinks there was a better player available that's a different discussion.

I wouldn't be surprised if scouts had other players at around the same grade and Leon simply made the overriding decision. Obi also fits in Perrin's wheelhouse. Utah seemed to steer toward the older, more mature players while he was there. I think Obi's main problem right now is strength. Going in, I think most scouts acknowledged that Obi needed to make some biomechanical changes and that would take time. I didn't realize that he had the core strength of a 13 yo. I remember KAT had the same issue as a rookie. Obi must get stronger. He had a late growth spurt, so I can see he isn't as developed physically. Everyone doesn't grow into Zion. But Obi needs to focus on his body next off-season.

Days before the draft, I think I had the Knicks taking Vassell with the 8th pick because I assumed, like most that Haliburton and Obi would be off the board. Obi and Haliburton being available at 8 was a slight surprise....Jay Bilas, who calls CBB games and was one of the commentators on draft night had Haliburton ranked ahead of Obi on his best players available list for what its worth...

As far as Rose possibly picking Obi over Haliburton I think is a strong possibility when you consider the rumors of the Knicks trying to trade up to get Obi....

I'm hopeful Leon's son gets to represent Cade, Suggs and Jalen Green

martin wrote:You don't draft for a moment in time and FO's know this. Randle is on a 2 year deal (at time of draft) and had not played well. Best talent was drafted

Of course you don’t pick a player solely given the current situation on the roster. But it should also be taken into account that Toppin will turn 23 in a few days. He is no longer a kid and doesn’t really have time to wait years for space to open up for him. Frank and Knox are both younger than him, not even to mention Barrett.

As I already written, I have certain doubts about his ceiling in this league, but we have what we have and hopefully I am wrong. I’d pick Vassell or Haliburton with that pick, but well, at least we didn’t trade anything for him because there was a rumor we are trying to trade up to take Obi.

But far from being an expert on young players. Barret was a no brainer, I was happy with Knox, and instead of Frank I wanted Smith or Monk ...