Jump to content

Mike1989

Members
  • Content Count

    695
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by Mike1989


  1. 10 hours ago, MagicFanDan said:

     

    Knicks taking heat for not doing a deal, but it might actually benefit them. I don’t see the line up - Brunson, Mitchell, Barrett (if he wasn’t traded), Randle and Robinson - competing for and wining a championship. 

    In a sense it would be similar to us having done a deal for Mitchell. He’d be a hell of an addition, but we aren’t competing for a championship yet. At least in Cleveland he’s got a young all star backcourt partner and two young all star quality front court players. Only position missing an all star caliber talent is small forward. Worth the risk for Cleveland if it works out because they’ve got the talent to compete for the east with his addition.


  2. 1 hour ago, Mauro Pedrosa said:

    I’m intrigued by this Towns + Gobert pairing.

    If Utah is blowing it up then go after Mitchell for sure. Keep Wagner, Banchero and Isaac and trade everyone else, I don’t even care

    The pairing should work. Towns can score heavily and has an accurate 3pt shot, while Gobert does his thing. Be interesting to see how it turns out for the Wolves having paid a heavy price for Gobert.

    1 hour ago, hootie249 said:

    Its 3 unprotected but yeah your statement stands. Holy crap. So its unprotected 23,25,27 and a swap in 26. Plus a top 5 protected in 29. WOW!

    We wouldn't have to do this for Mitchell. We could give two first rounders next year and two in 25. Thanks to the Bulls and Nuggets picks. So add a pick swap or two and unlike the Wolves all of the picks Would be in the years we were hoping to contend. All of them. We have to be the front runners for Mitchell. 

    Mitchells extension starts this year. So we have at worst 4 years of Mitchell and 6 years of Wagner and 7 years of Paolo all good rookies take extensions.

    Do it Weltman!

    If we got Mitchell for that deal I’d be a happy Magic fan, but in all honesty I don’t see him wanting to come here and play ball. I suspect he’ll want to go to a big market team if he leaves the small market in Utah.


  3. 33 minutes ago, CTMagicUK said:

    Their comparison to other skinny players is somewhat flawed. Yes, players like Anthony Davis, Giannis, and Durant came into the league skinny and managed to add weight. But what do they have in common? Broad shoulders, especially Davis and Giannis. They have very broad shoulders and have the frame to add the bulk. Chet is not only skinny but has a narrow frame. He currently weighs the same as some guards. The problem he will have in adding extra weight is how much can his frame legitimately add before it has a negative effect on his body? I suspect he’ll struggle to add sufficient weight.

    • Upvote 1

  4. 18 minutes ago, J Roc Baby said:

    Dude is Chet supposed to just never get bigger? We seriously have to pass on the clear #1 player because "NoOoOo HIMB too smAll he'll get hurt and suck forever!!" like he is physically maxed out? Meanwhile Zion straight kills himself every time he hits the court because HIMB too BiG and he will spend the rest of his career fighting against a body that desperately wants to be 300+ lbs. The concern is valid but take a breath and realize he has years to fill out 

     

    If Chet was 225 he'd be a unicorn. And we'd be dreaming about his reunification with Suggs and Wagner feeding him for unstoppable jump shots.

     

    Edit: take the skinny kid who dominates like men 30 lbs heavier and bet on him to gain that much and get better. Don't let injuries that haven't happened deter from the player

    That’s one extreme to another comparison Zion and Chet! 

    What you need to consider here is does Chet’s frame allow him to put on extra weight and size or is he a naturally skinny guy?

    Chet doesn’t have broad shoulders like Dwight Howard. His shoulders seem quite narrow and that doesn’t really allow for a great deal of weight and size to be added.

    Durability is a legitimate concern for someone as skinny as Chet. Plus, how is he going to handle bigger and stronger players when attacking and defending? He’s not an ideal prospect. Too risky.

    • Upvote 2

  5. 2 hours ago, CTMagicUK said:

    A less focused thought. 

    The #1 overall pick has never not dramatically altered this franchises fortunes. Jeff Weltman obviously has a great opportunity to add talent to this roster but also the burden to get this right. 

    Let’s hope the first pick delivers another franchise changing player! 

    The question I have is does this year’s draft class have a franchise changing talent? Or is this another draft class with some useful players but not needle moving players?

    I’m happy that we got the first pick, but I am not convinced we have a superstar waiting to be picked. I think it’s more likely we’ll get a good player than a great player. For example, I’ve seen Banchero compared to Julius Randle, which is not exactly the caliber of player a title contender builds around.

    Fingers crossed we land another superstar with the first pick, but I think a player in the next tier or two down is more likely. 

    • Upvote 1

  6. 9 hours ago, Albert Lergier said:

    NBADRAFT.NET updated on July 6 their mock:

    @ 33 - Greg Brown 6'9 Forward from Texas

    @ 5 - Scottie Barnes

    @ 8 - Keon Johnson  ( It has the Warriors taking Bouknight @ 7 )

     

     

    I can see why we might be interested in drafting Barnes because he’s got a bit of Draymond Green about him. He’s a point forward that plays hard at both ends of the court and can defend 1-5. He’s got good athleticism and size. The downside is his shooting and scoring, but if he can develop that side of his game he’s got a lot of upside, and if he can’t he’s got the skills to be a good starting player. 

    I’m not a supporter of the second pick. Keon has a ton of athleticism and plays hard defensively, and while he has intriguing upside, I don’t feel it is wise to be doubling down on players that can’t shoot and score. Ok our defense can be scarily good with the athleticism and defensive buy-in, but we will certainly struggle to shoot and score!

    For me, I’d rather take a gamble on Moses Moody developing into a plus player. His floor should be solid with his shooting, scoring and defensive ability. Ok his ceiling is more 3-and-D than all star, but who knows he could surprise people?! 

    Or considering Jalen Johnson from Duke and betting on his upside, or bet on Josh Giddey’s intriguing upside. 


  7. 12 hours ago, J-Mac said:

    PG had a similar scouting report coming from college, idk who you would take at 5 but kuminga is the bpa at 5 in my opinion. So until we trade up, kuminga is the player to go with at 5

    PG shot the ball better coming out of college. He shot 44% from outside as a freshman and 35% from outside in his second year. He made a huge jump from the free throw line going from 69% to 90%. But I will agree that as a prospect coming out of college he had elements of his game that he needed to fine tune to become a really good player. However, do keep in mind that he was discussed as a later lottery selection and not the fifth overall pick in the draft. Also, there was no need to put too much pressure on George because they had a prime Danny Granger and Roy Hibbert with solid starters built around them where they could slowly ease him into life in the NBA. 

    The problem we have is we don't have the same kind of team environment to bring him into. We would need to sign a veteran to start at small forward to allow us to bring Kuminga off the bench and ease him into life in the NBA. Maybe we can bring back Otto Porter at a reasonable rate? I guess we could throw the kid in straight away like the Knicks did with RJ Barrett and just ride the ups and downs, but realistically we would need to be patient with Kuminga while he tries to improve his shooting percentages, iron out his shot selection and play high effort defense consistently. 

    Is there anyone else we could take at 5? Not really and that's why I think a lot of Magic fans do feel a bit disgruntled at the minute. Once again we have probably missed out on selecting a franchise changing player and will have to bet on a player reaching their hypothetical upside, which to date hasn't really worked for us in recent years. Personally I am leaning towards trying to trade up or trade out to see if we can pick up a prospect we like in the league that we can bet on, but if we select Kuminga, then I will back him like I would any player on this team.  

    The alternative selection would be Scottie Barnes. Now offensively he doesn't offer prolific scoring or high percentage shooting, but he has shown that he can play the point forward role and initiate offense. Defensively he plays hard, can defend the paint and guard pretty much each position. He's got the size and build to be a really good NBA player and could project to be a similar player to Draymond Green. If Barnes ever develops the shooting and scoring side, then that increases his ceiling, but even without that he can be a very good NBA player. Problem for us is that it doesn't fill our need of scoring and shooting, and potentially creates a logjam at PF meaning we might need to look at the future of Isaac and/or Okeke, but that could be the alternative selection for us at 5.


  8. 15 hours ago, J-Mac said:

    He shot 46% on his twos and his field goal percentage was 39% because of his 3’s. So fixing his shot to where his 3 is respectable will make the game more easier for him. And he doesn’t have a lot to work on defensively, I’m starting to question if you’ve even looked up his scouting videos. He definitely needs to be more discipline on defense, but he doesn’t need “a lot” of work on that end.

    people say his floor is Jeff green so I mean I guess

    I’ve seen sufficient scouting videos and reports. Like I clearly said, he’s got to work on his effort at the defensive end because at times he coasts and there’s ample evidence in his time in the G-League. If he can continue developing his defensive array of skills AND put in consistent effort, he can be very good, but to date he’s shown inconsistent effort defensively.

    The key question here is does he view defense like Jabari Parker (ie “I’m paid to score, they don’t pay players to play defense”), or is he someone that needs the kick up the backside and the right coaching to turn it on? 

    Also, shooting has never been a particular strength of Kuminga’s even going back to high school. Now there is a belief that he can develop a consistent shot, but at the same time there is a risk because not every player does. Factor in his poor shot selection, which also goes back to high school, and that’s something that needs to improve.

    End of the day you can be a special athlete and still put up 20 points or more in high school or college because you’re the best athlete on the court. In the NBA, that won’t always be the case, and that’s why he needs to develop on both ends and become more consistent with his defensive effort, improve shot selection and develop his shooting. If he can do that, he can be a special talent, but there’s a pretty big drop off if he doesn’t.


  9. 4 minutes ago, s1n1st3r12 said:

    So is there any chance that Green falls to us? The only team that need a SG besides us that I can see would be Houston 

    Toronto would be in play for him as well with VanVleet at PG, Green SG, Anunoby SF, Siakim PF, and whoever at C. Likewise they could select Suggs and have him and VanVleet in the backcourt together. Essentially I can't see any of the top four prospects getting past Toronto because they can all fit into their existing lineup. 


  10. 36 minutes ago, J-Mac said:

    He already has the skill set of creating his own shot. So if he fixes his shot his percentage will go up. I don’t see what will be so hard about him improving.

    The kid is inefficient from outside, inside and from the line. He's got a lot of work to do on his shooting and his shot selection otherwise he will remain inefficient. Fair enough he could probably average 15-20 points a night in a high volume role, but that is no use to a winning team. That's without considering he has a lot of work to do on the defensive end as well, mostly down to his effort, but also some down to technique. 

    Obviously there's a lot of upside in Kuminga if he puts everything together, but there's also the risk of a low floor if he doesn't. 


  11. 7 hours ago, og magic fan said:

    So what.  Just because Isaac and Gordon didn't that doesn't automatically mean Kuminga won't.  Who else are you drafting at 5 that as you say can shoot and score?

    Honestly I’m not sure. That’s why I am so disappointed to fall because there’s no clear prospect to take at five that I would be entirely happy with. At the minute I’m leaning towards us trying to trade up or trading down. 

    7 hours ago, J-Mac said:

    Idk what you’re expectation is for an 18yr old who doesn’t turn 19 till October. Polished footwork, 40% 3 point threat like bro what? Obviously he needs work but look at what he did against grown men in the G league. He wasn’t playing college ball and plus he was under an nba system already under Brian Shaw. I would enjoy watching the kid

    Averages wise he takes 5 three pointers a game and only hits on 25% of them. His other offensive percentages are inefficient as well. Ok, he’s still a kid and those numbers could improve, but there’s a lot of work he’ll need to do to become an efficient scorer, and generally a lot of high volume inefficient scorers can find it hard to improve because they tend to have shot selection problems to overcome as well.

    6 hours ago, Babir_9 said:

    Kuminga is already more polished than Gordon and Isaac in college. And his jumper looks better as well.

    Gordon and Isaac shot better in college than Kuminga did in the G-League and possessed as much upside as Kuminga. His form might look ok, but Kuminga is just so inefficient at this point and that is a concern. If we was drafting him with Chicago’s pick, fair enough, but we aren’t and that’s my problem.

    It’s like when people link us to Keon Johnson from Tennessee. He’s got a ton of athleticism and plays tough on the defensive end, however he’s offensively inefficient. Now if Johnson puts it altogether he could be special, but there’s a significant risk that he might note, however if he doesn’t then at least he’s a very athletic and defensively strong player. Kuminga doesn’t contribute as much defensively, so there’s a lot of work to be done on the defensive end and on his shooting.

     


  12. 12 minutes ago, J-Mac said:

    They are 100% going to be fun to watch, to be the size kuminga is and to move like that sheesh 

    I guess he could provide a highlight reel with dunking and attacking the rim, but the rest of his game is unlikely to be fun to watch or develop to the extent that would see him become a star. 


  13. 7 minutes ago, og magic fan said:

    He is only 18 and his shot doesn't look that bad.  Uber athletic and finishes well with both hands.  He has questionable shot selection at times but that can be fixed.  

    Isaac and Gordon both showed a fair stroke in college, yet neither player has developed into consistent shooters and are unlikely to become prolific outside shooters.

    Sometimes players can develop their shooting, and shot selection can improve with age and experience, but there are more examples of players that don’t. 

    The way this team has been built in recent years I’d like to see us try to draft players that can shoot and score, rather than pin our hopes on fixing and improving their shooting. 

    • Upvote 1

  14. 1 hour ago, harley said:

    Just take Kuminga. Drafting is about upside, he has the highest upside in draft. We’re rebuilding. It’s a no brainer. I’d take him at 2 behind Cade

    The upside is tied to him being able to develop an outside shot. At the minute he hasn’t got that in his armoury, and while it is possible he could develop an outside shot, it would be another example of us taking someone that can’t shoot and pinning our hopes on him developing that facet of his game.

    Aaron Gordon and Jonathan Isaac were both drafted with lots of upside, but neither player has developed a consistent outside shot, and neither are number one options. Kuminga strikes me as a similar player, but where they have the advantage is they were/are superior defensive players.

    Kuminga is just an unappealing pick, but I can see him or Barnes being the guy at five.

     


  15. The question is which team from the top four could select someone outside the consensus top four? 

    Detroit should take Cade Cunningham and build around him.

    Houston are pretty much starting from scratch outside of a few players like Wood, Porter Jr and Martin Jr. I think Mobley would fit in well, but equally Suggs’ point guard skills would work, and Green’s scoring would too.

    Cleveland could select Kuminga or Barnes to slot in at PF if they want to build around a Sexton and Garland backcourt, with Allen at centre. That said, Mobley’s sheer upside would be an almost no brainer, Green’s scoring would have appeal, and perhaps even Suggs’ point guard skills would too. 

    Toronto has a core of VanVleet, OG and Siakam. The holes for them is at one of the guards or the centre spot, so Suggs and Mobley would be ideal fits. Only time the Suggs selection might not work is if they bring back Lowry, but would that be enough to pass on Suggs? I’m not convinced.

    Fingers crossed one of these teams selects a player outside the consensus top four, however I am not convinced that they will. Each of the top four prospects could fit in well on each roster which leaves us with choosing from what’s left and that’s a pretty big drop off.


  16. It’s certainly disappointing that we have fallen outside the top four picks. If we stick with the picks and the top four goes as expected, we are potentially faced with adding yet another lengthy SF/PF prospect with questionable to non-existent outside shooting (Kuminga/Barnes) or selecting prospects that strike me as late lottery picks. 

    At the minute I’d say we have to hope that one of the teams in the top four fall in love with someone unexpected like the Bulls did with Patrick Williams last year, or we make a trade of some sort. That could be trading up or trading the picks for a combination of a prospect and picks. 


  17. 10 hours ago, chosen12 said:

    Yeah, I can see Suggs as I stated, Hampton is a keeper as a 2/1 combo Guard. But Fultz wants to be a leader of this team, and so does Anthony. I think we need shooting, we have Okeke, JI, Carter and Ross returning, but no consistent scoring except Ross and Hampton.........where is the scoring? I kind of smell a Fultz trade package in the  future, the very near future, and I don't know that I am going to be comfortable with that.

    Like you, I want Fultz to succeed as a Magic player, but already in his short career he’s had a shoulder issue and an ACL injury. Durability is certainly a question mark. 

    At this point in time we just need to draft the best player available and try to rebuild around a team that has plenty of scoring and shooting. I do think that Anthony, Hampton and Fultz can be part of that future, but at the same time we need to be prepare for the possibility that we move on from one of them.


  18. 11 hours ago, All Eyes On Me said:

    Mo really really struggles in post defense, he just can’t be physical. I swear he hasn’t gained any strength in 3 years in the league 

    Bamba is tall and lanky. Never struck me as someone that would ever become built like Howard or Embiid, he was more likely to be a Larry Sanders like player with a more slender build. Sadly Bamba will never be as useful on the defensive end. 


  19. 10 minutes ago, hootie249 said:

       Bamba was the 4th big man chosen in that draft, at number 6. That... well that says it all. And two of those big men were chosen instead of the most exciting college player that year and the guy who was actually the best player in that draft. Add in Jaren Jackson Jr, to this equation and you will see the guys in charge are infatuated with outdated thinking. 

    People, always remember this. Even if a person is  in charge and payed well, it doesn't mean they know what that the hell they are doing. Some industries are full of people who are relics of the past or hired from nepotism. Sports franchises are well represented in this area. NBA Gm's still like size over anything else. Even in a world of 1000's of crazy athletic, supersized big men who probably just want to get paid and never wanted to play basketball. 40 years ago these guys were 1 in a million. Now they are 1 in 100,000 better find guys who love basketball.

    Our front office live off their reputation of finding Giannis and their 2010 executive award for their one year wonder season. Take that away and what did their tenure in Milwaukee have to show?

    240-318 regular season win loss record. A few play off appearances and never won a series. They even drafted Thon Maker tenth overall! 

    I suppose we wanted a veteran front office after we had a young up and comer in Henny running the show, but personally I’m not sure how much faith I do have in our front office rebuilding, but a change doesn’t appear to be coming. 

    • Upvote 1

  20. On 4/7/2021 at 6:19 PM, CTMagicUK said:

    The age and length shouldn't be a factor in the decision? Of course they should. We're not drafting guys for who they are now but who they're going to be 3+ years down the line. Age is a factor in how much developing a player has left to do. And length is a huge factor in the NBA in general, to ignore it would be foolish. I'm not saying just draft long guys but when you have two comparable prospects (which to be fair I don't think Wagner and Kispert are) the guy who has better positional size is always going to be more valuable. Those extra inches might be the difference between blocking a shot or not, getting a shot over the defender or not etc. 

     

    Based off their listed heights, which we should alway take with a pinch of salt, there is 2 inches in it. Wagner might be taller, but he’s not a better shooter and he’s not a standout athlete. Kispert should transition well into a Joe Harris like role. That’s ideal for this team at the 2/3 spot, lights out shooter with a good IQ for team defence.

    Length and age can be important, but we need contributors. We need to use that second pick smartly and identify someone that can come in and make a difference. For me, I’d rather draft the elite shooter and capable defensive talent than another project. 3 years down the line we’ll be wanting to be a play off team again and a talent like Kispert (a Harris/Bogdanovic like player) can be an ideal starter IF we have stars in other positions. 

    Anyway, it’s good for us to have debate and options available for both our picks. 

    • Upvote 1

  21. 4 hours ago, Natesroom said:

    Isnt he a guard? it would be tough to draft him with Fultz, Hampton, Cole on the team. I would draft him and trade up or package him in trade for something. If he can play two guard maybe i'd draft him.

    He’s got the size to play the 2-guard, though whether his game would fit that role is debatable. Same goes for Fultz and Hampton, both have the size to play the 2-guard spot, but fit is debatable. 

    With that said, at this point in our rebuild I wouldn’t discount any guard because we have Fultz, Hampton or Cole on the roster. If our FO believe there’s a franchise changing guard available, we should select them and work out what to do with those already on the roster at a later date. 


  22. 4 hours ago, CTMagicUK said:

    But Kispert isn't a 3 and D guy. He's a 3 point shooting specialist. Davion Mitchell and Jared Butler roasted him on switches every time down in the national championship game and those guys might end up only being bench guards in the league. If you want a guy that can score, shoot and play defense I can name 5 off the top of my head with more upside than Kispert with the Bulls pick. I've already mentioned 2 in this post. 

    Franz Wagner is two and a half years younger than Kispert, bigger, and is better at virtually everything except the 3 ball. And he didn't play with a top 5 pick point guard and one of the best bigs in college basketball to get him open looks.

    The "proven shooter" thing is the same argument people gave for Aaron Nesmith last year and he's currently shooting 32% from 3 and barely seeing the floor for a Boston team desperate for someone to contribute on the wing. 

    Wagner is an average athlete. The age and length shouldn’t be a factor in the decision. Kispert is ready to contribute now as a elite shooter and with some development can improve his defence because he’s a max effort player. Length we’ve already got plenty of, so we don’t need another rangy forward come guard that doesn’t have a clear position. 

    By no means am I saying draft Kispert because there are clearly other options, but the criticism of him as a selection is unwarranted. We need to add players that can shoot and score rather than keep going for projects that can’t because they are young, lengthy and athletic. 

    I guess we could field a team of young, lengthy and athletic players that aim to shut teams down with a smothering defensive game. But if they struggle to shoot and score consistently they will never win in the modern NBA. Today’s game is based around shooting and scoring, and if we want to push up those standings, we need to get with the times and put together a roster that can shoot and score as well as play acceptable defense. 


  23. On 4/6/2021 at 8:24 AM, CTMagicUK said:

    Much rather take a swing at someone with more upside than draft Kispert in the lottery. 

    How many raw high upside picks actually make it anywhere near to their ceiling? If they have a solid floor, say a starting caliber 3-and-D, fair enough take a swing on that upside. But sometimes some of those prospects are too raw and never develop as expected. 

    If we are taking someone with our second first round pick, then adding someone that should be  a good 3-and-D player like Kispert is a pretty useful pick. If he can contribute to a team like Joe Harris does at Brooklyn or Tyler Herro at Miami, then that’s a good selection with the second first rounder. 

    The likes of Kuminga and Barnes may have more upside, but neither of them have a consistent outside shot and both players will require a lot of development to become starting caliber players, and some of that will be tied to their ability to develop a consistent shot.  

    For me, in this rebuild we need to prioritise drafting players that can score, shoot and play defence. Yes there is a place to draft athletic, length and high upside players, but that can’t become the obsession like it has in the recent past. 

    • Upvote 3

  24. 10 hours ago, TrueMagicFan07 said:

    The Bulls are tearing it up tonight against the Pacers. Vuch was a good trade for them.

    Vuch  was their top scorer even when they lost games.

    It’s a trade that made sense for them. They added a second all star to pair with Lavine who has a consistent game to pair with his potentially explosive game. They can interlace their other talent into the team like White and Williams. Plenty of room for them to develop beyond a typical team stuck in limbo, especially if Williams becomes the third star in that team.

    It is a shame and odd to see Vuc in another team’s colours though. 

×