Nalod wrote:knickstorrents wrote:I'd rather get 2 shots at the draft rather than 1, since I don't think RJ Barrett is that great. Given that it's a crapshoot, I'd rather get 2 shots at a star rather than 1.So if I can trade down and get Jarrett Culver who I like much more, and another pick, even if its late in the lottery like 20 plus, I think its worth it. Because RJ Barrett is the type of player that helps sell tickets, not win games.
To peg him as you have, I can't agree with your assessment. This kid is accomplished in his own right.
Im on record for prescribing that more opportunities create luck. So I have to agree. At the same time I have to have a very strong conviction about who I want to make a trade like your saying and the price. If its Culver, where is he drafted at? At the same time in reverse the team doing the deal has to have a very strong conviction for whom they want at the three. Depends on their objectives as well. I liked Culver at the 5 spot where I thought we were drafting. The situation is perspective. Won't know for 3-4 years.
I look at it like this. If Culver were a guaranteed star, wouldn’t he be a top 4 pick no matter what at 3? If not 3, then why is Garland even being semi considered at 4 let alone getting a promise, rather than Culver? Why would Atlanta even consider trading their 2 picks for the 3rd, if they thought Culver was a star?
If you trade the pick for AD, I can get that. I get why. I don’t love the idea of trading everything for AD but I get it. He’s a guaranteed super duper star.
But trading something that’s guaranteed to at least be really good for 2 things far less known is a bad gamble. This is not a deep draft. We need to take advantage of where we are.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
