Woj said that in April and he said it was because of fit in Orlando and he said nothing about OKC, you sure are extrapolating a lot from that 1 blurb.
Doesn't matter when he said it or what team. they would still be 1/2 regardless like i said you sure do do all you can to downplay these two just because you're in love with banchero
I am willing to bet you have far more players stick than. players picked at 34. Would you rather have Jones over Sengun? It's easy to cherry-pick guys than actually go over the actual hit rate of picks in those areas.
I am not the one downplaying anybody and you are the guy creating myths for your favorite guys. It does not matter what his actual words are? That explains a lot.
Sengun wasn't even picked in that range. And if I didn't need a big, I would pick jones. The whole ordeal of your post was you thinking it's completely outrageous picking 17 to 34. It isn't. There's just as many misses and busts compared to finding a rotational player in that range
you certainly are. You've done that for a long time. I typically just gloss over it cause you've said same thing over and over and over. At least when the draft is over we can finally see you stop complaining
LOL im sure someone is going to spin this into well i disagree they're not top 2 and as if this wasn't known. mental hoops! Edit: just saw I was spot on lmao
I'm not suggesting 34 is as good as 17, but you're not moving up from 3 to 2 without paying a cost. As far as talent level, I'll compare two players I'm extremely familiar with as a Jayhawk fan. Ochai Agbaji is routinely mocked around 17, Christian Braun around 34. Agbaji is marginally more athletic and currently a marginally better shooter. Braun is taller and both are lockdown defenders and all around solid 3/D prospects. Braun also plays a position of need as opposed to Agbaji being somewhat redundant since our franchise guy plays the same position. So as an example, it could be argued Braun at 34 would not be a huge dropoff from Agbaji at 17 for our team. There could also be several legit backup centers available at 34. It's not likely to land a starter at 17, so trading back may be a good option if a good deal isn't there to trade up, particularly if it's part of a bigger deal such as the one mentioned above.
Boards from media. Few weeks ago. Tier 1 Jabari / Chet / PaoloTier 2 Ivey / Sharpe / Keegan After boards more or less consistently have the 1& 2 the same people. It's more like this now. Tier 1 Jabari / ChetTier 2 Ivey / PaoloTier 2.5 Keegan * Sharpe dropped below 2.x
Although I'm still seeing mocks with Paolo or Ivey going 2nd. Which is why this stuff is so much fun.
And I am saying it's not worth moving from 3 to 2 and giving up that capital, while you have people trying to claim 34 is in the same tier. You are cherry-picking prospects to make a point and then claiming what those players, attributes are I am no fan of Agbaji but there is a reason why he is mocked 17 spots before Braun routinely. It's not likely to even get an NBA player at 34 but you are ok trading up one spot and not getting a rotational guy with a team this bad? We got both Sengun and JC before the 34th pick would you rather have Green and Rokus Jokubaitus than those 2 guys or one of those guys?
Last year Trey Murphy went 17 and Herbert Jones 35, so that makes the argument perfectly. Plus guys like Kessler and Koloko could be there if they want to solve the backup center problem. I'm not saying they should make this trade, but if they do I'll be fine with it. It would all hinge on how well they draft at 34.
So again you are cherry-picking data points and if you can move Jones up I can move Sengun down a spot to fit the argument. And once again you ignore the history of what you get at pick 17 against what you get at 34. I will ask once again why is moving up 1 spot for a guy who is widely considered on the same tier as 3 worth more than moving all the way down from 17 to 34? I want to do a lot more than solve the backup C problem at 17 and even then you have a far better chance to do that at 17. You are creating the best possible scenario to justify this and not looking at the facts that have been proven over time? Are you actually sure Murphy will not be the better player over time than Jones?
Magic have a lot of young talent in place. Perfect fit in Orlando so I can see them taking the safest choice and best fit at #1. Magic really need shooting and Jabari fits with their young ball dominant guards very nicely. You can continue to develop Cole and Suggs and it won't hurt Jabari's development like it might with the other prospects.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I can argue both sides of the trade though. I think it's a no brainer for OKC, and would hinge on our brass being convinced Jabari/Chet is a tier all their own. This is one where I would have to trust the front office. Personally, I'd stand pat at 3 and try to move up to 13 or higher by packaging 17 and Wood, EG and/or Tate. I do think things drop off pretty drastically after 15, it was unusual that a guy as skilled as Sengun fell to 16.
The Magic do not have an apex scorer to actually get them over the hump and Chet is redundant to Issac if we really want to break it down. Banchero is not some ball hogging chucker he would fit in with anybody while also having a chance to be that go-to guy, there is no reason Banchero will hurt the development of Cole and Suggs he would actually help their development. I have no idea when it became a goal to pick top 3 to get a pick that "fits" with a team who has been as bad as the Magic for so long. I don't understand why Banchero is not the safest pick anyway he has the lowest number of holes in his game.
I don't think you can argue for trading 17 to move up one pick when all 3 guys are rated together it does not make sense. You still can't ague sensibly that pick 34 gives you just as good a chance as getting a player at 17 it makes zero sense.
