# Draft Thread 2013



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Didn't see a draft thread up yet, I think we are past due. Who you got?

*Bulls specifically*: Would LOVE to get Gorgui Dieng with our #20 pick. This guy has Chicago Bull written all over him (for better or worse). Not a high upside pick by any stretch, but he fills a very important need for us and is NBA ready from Day 1. Great defender inside and out, legit center size & length, good athleticism, and just a smart all around player on both sides. He's almost like a center sized version of Taj Gibson. Mainly he takes over the Omer Asik role that was sorely missed at times last year which will help keep Noah's minutes down. I'd be excited to see what Thibs can do with Dieng's defensive talent...and to get him for the next 4 years on a cheap rookie contract, even better. Hopefully he doesn't get snagged before we pick!

Other players I'd consider if they fall to us (and no, I am not giving up assets to move up in this terrible draft): 
- Steven Adams -- athletically talented center with good size. More raw than Dieng though.
- Kentavious Caldwell-Pope -- tremendous scorer at college level. Legit SG size (6'6), great athlete and killer 3-pt shot. Low downside player IMO, at worst is a scoring punch off the bench, maybe starter caliber some day.
- Jeff Withy -- Asik 2.0?? Not quite as athletic but very similar style otherwise. And great size/length and shotblocking. Could do far worse for a long term Noah backup.

*General draft thoughts*: Is it just me, or is Nerlens Noel just a terrible idea for the #1 pick? The guy just seems like an offensively limited, perpetually injury prone risk who will take at least 2-3 years before he makes a noticeable impact. I don't understand why he's considered the #1 pick even in a weak draft like this. There are at least 5-7 guys I'd take over him. 

If I'm Cleveland, I say screw it and take Otto Porter #1. You're not getting a franchise player at #1 so you might as well take the best fit/best all around talent. I'm hesitant on Ben McLemore. Seems like at best a Jason Richardson level player.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Dieng would be perfect for Chicago. He's already a very good passing big man and I'm sure Noah would help him develop that even more. With his shot blocking and rebounding, Chicago really wouldn't miss too much when Noah wasn't in the game. Adams would be a nice pick-up as well.

Chicago will have a plethora of bigs to pick from at 20. At least a few of Gobert, Olynyk, Adams, Plumlee, Dieng, Withey, Muscala, and Iverson will be available. Otherwise, I'm assuming they'll target a backup swingman. Is the long-term plan now to keep Deng at SF and play Butler at the 2?


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> Dieng would be perfect for Chicago. He's already a very good passing big man and I'm sure Noah would help him develop that even more. With his shot blocking and rebounding, Chicago really wouldn't miss too much when Noah wasn't in the game. Adams would be a nice pick-up as well.
> 
> Chicago will have a plethora of bigs to pick from at 20. At least a few of Gobert, Olynyk, Adams, Plumlee, Dieng, Withey, Muscala, and Iverson will be available. Otherwise, I'm assuming they'll target a backup swingman. Is the long-term plan now to keep Deng at SF and play Butler at the 2?


Yeah, even though it's a weak draft as a whole, I'd say it is a strong draft for a team looking for a rotation quality backup C, which we are. More options this year than most drafts for a mid to late 1st round pick. We need a cheap backup who can defend and keep Noah healthy. 

Backup swingman could still be possible, but I only see it happening if all the quality bigs are gone by the #20 pick, or if a super wing talent slips down to us. All else being equal, the Bulls will just opt for a vet minimum signing for backup SG/SF positions. 

To answer your question...the most likely starting lineup next year is Rose, Butler, Deng, Boozer, Noah...unless there is a major trade coming, and no signs of that so far. So yes, Butler and Deng are in the future plans. Probably Butler more than Deng, since Deng is entering the last year of his contract and will turn 30 yrs old soon. Then again, Thibodeau and the Bulls front office love Deng so it would have to be a home run trade, IMO.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

As far as the Butler/Deng experiment, I'm thinking Deng is the odd man out. Not this year, but probably next, the Bulls look to sign a legit SG/SF player in FA and plug Butler in the opposite slot. Deng/Boozer out, with the Free Agent and Mirotic in. Line up would be Rose/FA/Butler/Mirotic/Noah. Just the way I see it playing out.

With the draft, I'm liking Dieng too. If the plan is to land a back-up big, he fits the bill the best.

With this weak draft, I'm sold on McLemore as number 1. If he became JRich 2.0, I'd be happy. Noel scares me a bit too... but if you have patience, I think he will develop into a productive defensive player. We suffered through the early years of Tyson Chandler, and he developed into a good defensive force. Not top of the draft worthy, but with this years draft crop uncertainty, maybe it's better to gamble on a guy that at least will be good at something for sure.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

to me i'm more of a fan of the bulls rolling the dice , you can get a 4th big off the FA market , and its a limited need anyway with taj around who can play both the 4 and 5 .

i think the bulls should go for a perimeter guy who can be a star i think adetokumbo can be that guy .

there are others who look like they have that kind of potential too, like glen rice jr. or ricky ledo


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> to me i'm more of a fan of the bulls rolling the dice , you can get a 4th big off the FA market , and its a limited need anyway with taj around who can play both the 4 and 5 .
> 
> i think the bulls should go for a perimeter guy who can be a star i think adetokumbo can be that guy .
> 
> there are others who look like they have that kind of potential too, like glen rice jr. or ricky ledo


It all depends on who is available... but it's obvious that a 4th big and a wing player, preferably a SG, are the two biggest needs.

That 4th big is more important though, IMO... I liked Nazr, but lets be honest, he was less than impressive in any stretch. Having a young, legit big, to develop and play spot minutes will be a big addition to this team...Especially when we switch from Boozer to Mirotic  ...we are going to need that bulk to bang around down low for 9-12 minutes a game...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

I'll pass on Dieng. You can find a guy in the second round or via free agency to do the things he can do. Hes a college shot blocker, who's size dominated in the NCAA level, similar to what Larry Sanders did. Hes not much of a prospect and he already does similar things to what Noah and Taj do, we need some offense. 

At 20, if a guy like Shabazz Mohamad drops, you gotta pick him up. This year you gotta swing for the fences and avoid guys similar to what our guys can already do. Tony Mitchell, Muhammad and Mason Plumlee have the athleticism that we are sorely lacking.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I don't think finding a Dieng caliber defensive player is all that easy. I might agree if you're talking about Jeff Withey who is one-dimensional (interior defender/shotblocker). Dieng is a pretty versatile defender for a guy who is 6'11 with a 7'3 wingspan and 9'4 standing reach. He is very mobile and can defend both inside and outside, which is critical when trying to take down Miami's small ball lineups. That would make Noah, Gibson, and Dieng completely interchangeable defensively. Thibodeau needs horses like that to execute his take-down-Miami defensive schemes. Dieng is also a smart player offensively so he will not kill you with dumb decisions the way many rookies would. 

If we gamble on a raw talent like Ricky Ledo, we end up waiting 3 years for a guy who appears to have character issues and needs the ball to feel comfortable doing anything. That is not going to help us win a title anytime soon, nor will Thibs play him, and not consistent with the state of the team right now.

I'm not wholly opposed to gambling on a high ceiling talent this year (e.g., I like Caldwell-Pope...athletic and 3-pt threat), however it needs to be someone that can fit a rotational role off the bench, or a draft and stash player. We are already capped out on salary and need cheap contributors to round out the bench. This #20 pick is the perfect oppportunity to get a new bench mob guy, whether that is Dieng or a wing.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> At 20, if a guy like Shabazz Mohamad drops, you gotta pick him up. This year you gotta swing for the fences and avoid guys similar to what our guys can already do. Tony Mitchell, Muhammad and Mason Plumlee have the athleticism that we are sorely lacking.


I highly doubt Shabazz Muhammad drops to us at #20. He is dropping but not that far. If he did, then yeah we'd have to consider it strongly...even short term we could use him as a scoring punch off the bench. Though I don't blame GMs for passing on him with their lotto picks, he screams overrated to me. 

I would consider Plumlee at #20 as well. There is a decent chance he's available. I like his athleticsm and size. Though I do worry he will struggle to find a niche at the NBA level. As of now I can't definitely say what he will do well in the NBA other than rebounding. Definitely not a great defensive player and won't score at a high level either. Maybe Thibs can teach him some defense though with his athletic ability.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I don't think finding a Dieng caliber defensive player is all that easy. I might agree if you're talking about Jeff Withey who is one-dimensional (interior defender/shotblocker). Dieng is a pretty versatile defender for a guy who is 6'11 with a 7'3 wingspan and 9'4 standing reach. He is very mobile and can defend both inside and outside, which is critical when trying to take down Miami's small ball lineups. That would make Noah, Gibson, and Dieng completely interchangeable defensively. Thibodeau needs horses like that to execute his take-down-Miami defensive schemes. Dieng is also a smart player offensively so he will not kill you with dumb decisions the way many rookies would.


Dieng doesn't have the speed to guard Lebron so his presence on this team isn't all that important. Like I said before, if it comes down to drafting at the very least another defensive type of player or taking a risk on a pure athlete. I think the Bulls should take a risk and go with the athlete. 



> If we gamble on a raw talent like Ricky Ledo, we end up waiting 3 years for a guy who appears to have character issues and needs the ball to feel comfortable doing anything. That is not going to help us win a title anytime soon, nor will Thibs play him, and not consistent with the state of the team right now.


Well Ledo is a projected mid 2nd round pick, so the risk/reward level there is not too bad. But, guys like Plumlee and Muhammad are more of a sure thing than a guy like Dieng and they have higher upside. The only thing consistent about this team right now, is losing important games. Look at what the Pacers are doing to the Heat, Lance Stepehenson is playing an important role on this team, the guy was a risk and a potential character issue, but hes panned out. 



> I'm not wholly opposed to gambling on a high ceiling talent this year (e.g., I like Caldwell-Pope...athletic and 3-pt threat), however it needs to be someone that can fit a rotational role off the bench, or a draft and stash player. We are already capped out on salary and need cheap contributors to round out the bench. This #20 pick is the perfect oppportunity to get a new bench mob guy, whether that is Dieng or a wing.


This should not be the mentality. The mentality should be, lets find/draft the best player available, the BEST player who can get us closer to winning a title. A team like the Bulls who have lost in disappointing fashion in the playoffs *5 *years in row, should not have the mentality of drafting "Fit" guys.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

I have been doing my usual draft research, and have not really come up with my exact draft board yet, but I can share who I like and do not like at this point.

*Guys projected to go higher than our pick but take them if they are there*
-----
Alex Len
Cody Zeller
-----
Shabazz Mohammed

*Likely to be late lottery or out of the lottery*
-----
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope
Kelly Olynyk
Steven Adams
Mason Plumlee
-----
Rudy Gobert
Gorgui Dieng
Jeff Withey
-----
Allen Crabbe
Glen Rice Jr.
Giannis Adetokoubo
-----

I am a big Len and Zeller fan. I think they will both be in the conversation of best in draft class by the end of their rookie deals.

I am a big Caldwell-Pope guy and I'd probably take him over any of the guys I mentioned outside of the first group. If we do not get him, I am willing to take just about any of the bigs I have listed unless Crabbe or Rice really show you something in workouts.

I have not watched as much film on the bigs as I would like, so I may reorder them as I have seen more.

Seeing how our second round pick is unlikely to make the team, I am all for drafting and stashing the best international prospect we can get.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

What do you guys think about Tony Mitchell. The guy is an absolute athletic freak, I like his size and athleticism but hes one of those players with no NBA position yet. At 20, the guy can be developed into a hell of a player.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Dieng doesn't have the speed to guard Lebron so his presence on this team isn't all that important. Like I said before, if it comes down to drafting at the very least another defensive type of player or taking a risk on a pure athlete. I think the Bulls should take a risk and go with the athlete.


Nobody is asking him to chase Lebron around or defend him one on one. Defending Lebron (and Wade) is a team effort that relies on consistent help defense from your bigs. Use Jimmy or Deng to play him close and physical, then if he blows by you, the help from our big guys needs to be there. That is why you need mobile big men with good defensive focus. Noah and Gibson are great for that but those guys can't be out there for 48 minutes. We need a 3rd big who can play that role. 

IMO, it is highly unlikely we get a dynamic wing player at the #20 pick who will score well at the NBA level, at least not on Day 1. I say accept the fact that this is a crappy draft and be happy there might be a rotation quality big man who can contribute right away for us, and on a cheap rookie contract for the next 4 years.

Though I actually agree with you that we take Muhammad if he's there at #20...I just don't think he'll slip that far. And #20 is not a pick I would use on Ricky Ledo. I would take a flyer on Ledo in Round 2, but again I think someone will snag him in the late 1st or early 2nd round. I think we agree more than you realize, I am just taking into account who is likely to be there at our picks, and not wanting to take certain players too early when there are some decent NBA ready rotation players who are there for the taking.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> I have been doing my usual draft research, and have not really come up with my exact draft board yet, but I can share who I like and do not like at this point.
> 
> *Guys projected to go higher than our pick but take them if they are there*
> -----
> ...


I like alot of these guys...except I'm not high on Gobert or Giannis. Both guys are getting drafted solely on physical upside, and are way too raw with their skill level and readiness to handle the physical grind of an NBA season. 

I particularly like Caldwell-Pope because he has some nice skills that should translate well to the NBA, such as the ability to catch and shoot from 3-pt land, fast in the open floor, and legit SG size at 6'6.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

My dark horse pick is Tim Hardaway Jr. I'm not sure if #20 is too high or not without seeing him outside that Michigan system. So gotta rely on the Bulls scouts on whether he is worth it. But still there are some things I like about him...good 2-guard size, and very athletic, good all-around game, and I like the interviews I've seen of him, seems like he'll be a smart player who'll fit in well.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> What do you guys think about Tony Mitchell. The guy is an absolute athletic freak, I like his size and athleticism but hes one of those players with no NBA position yet. At 20, the guy can be developed into a hell of a player.


Haven't seen much of him, but it seems like he'll play the 4 in the NBA predominantly. Begs the question...with Boozer here, Mirotic waiting in the wings, Gibson locked up long-term, and a cheap athletic 3rd string PF in Malcolm Thomas...Mitchell just seems pretty redundant. And looking at his stat sheet, it's often a red flag when a guy has more than 3 turnovers for every 1 assist...that is Eddy Curry like. Concerning that he'd be a black hole on offense.

Definitely a nice athlete though...just not sure he would develop here.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Double post ....


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> What do you guys think about Tony Mitchell. The guy is an absolute athletic freak, I like his size and athleticism but hes one of those players with no NBA position yet. At 20, the guy can be developed into a hell of a player.


He's an athlete and he has certain skills but no real position on offense but athletically can defend both forward spots , good shot blocker

No post game and no handle (cant use weak hand at all)but can shoot when open and off. Rebound 

Could be a Marion type standout if everything broke right for him

The bulls don't look like a good fit


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Nobody is asking him to chase Lebron around or defend him one on one. Defending Lebron (and Wade) is a team effort that relies on consistent help defense from your bigs. Use Jimmy or Deng to play him close and physical, then if he blows by you, the help from our big guys needs to be there. That is why you need mobile big men with good defensive focus. Noah and Gibson are great for that but those guys can't be out there for 48 minutes. We need a 3rd big who can play that role.



Right. This is like saying Omer Asik or Roy Hibbert can't guard LeBron, and therefore shouldn't be on your team.

You don't ask your center to guard LeBron. You ask him to guard the rim.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Nobody is asking him to chase Lebron around or defend him one on one. Defending Lebron (and Wade) is a team effort that relies on consistent help defense from your bigs. Use Jimmy or Deng to play him close and physical, then if he blows by you, the help from our big guys needs to be there. That is why you need mobile big men with good defensive focus. Noah and Gibson are great for that but those guys can't be out there for 48 minutes. We need a 3rd big who can play that role.
> 
> IMO, it is highly unlikely we get a dynamic wing player at the #20 pick who will score well at the NBA level, at least not on Day 1. I say accept the fact that this is a crappy draft and be happy there might be a rotation quality big man who can contribute right away for us, and on a cheap rookie contract for the next 4 years.
> 
> Though I actually agree with you that we take Muhammad if he's there at #20...I just don't think he'll slip that far. And #20 is not a pick I would use on Ricky Ledo. I would take a flyer on Ledo in Round 2, but again I think someone will snag him in the late 1st or early 2nd round. I think we agree more than you realize, I am just taking into account who is likely to be there at our picks, and not wanting to take certain players too early when there are some decent NBA ready rotation players who are there for the taking.


Thats fine, but when talking about a guy like Dieng, I dont see a guy who will bring something new to this team. Defensively he can guard 4's and bigger 3's but I don't see a guy who can change a game on defense alone. 

His post moves look decent but at times slow and robotic, I don't know he gets his offense off in the next level. Defensively hes going to be a help side shot blocker, I don't think hes got enough bulk or quickness to stay in front of guys. 

So my question is, do we need another help defender?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> So my question is, do we need another help defender?



I think the answer to that is pretty clearly yes, given the loss of Asik. You don't pick him if you think there is a guy on the board who can be a star wing player, but if that guy isn't on the board, then a big help defender is pretty much the next thing you'd want to go after.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

The way I see things, we need to build a team that can take down Miami. The formula that slows down their offense is tight physical perimeter defense paired with air tight help D anywhere 5-feet from the basket and inward. We have same great pieces already in Hinrich (Wade defender), Jimmy (Wade/Bron defender), Deng (Bron defender), Noah/Taj (Bosh defenders, help D), but depth is important because, a) guys get into foul trouble against a flopping team like Miami, and b) Miami plays a fast tempo and we need to keep fresh legs. 

Also it is beneficial, maybe essential, to have bigs that won't get torched if they switch on D. On top of that, Miami has been using this 5-man shooter lineup alot and not many teams can defend it...Ray Allen, Lebron, Battier, Bosh, and Chalmers. They literally will put Ray, Battier, Bosh, and Chalmers out on the 3-pt line, and isolate Lebron with the ball on top. The lane is wide open, Lebron drives, if help comes he kicks out to one of the 4 shooters (wherever the help came from). We cannot afford to let Miami dictate those matchups. The best defensive scheme to counter this is one that matches mobile big men who can defend both inside and outside, provide quick help but still recover. I see someone like Dieng being the perfect addition to contribute to that defensive scheme.

Now offensively, obviously we need to score to beat Miami.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> I think the answer to that is pretty clearly yes, given the loss of Asik. You don't pick him if you think there is a guy on the board who can be a star wing player, but if that guy isn't on the board, then a big help defender is pretty much the next thing you'd want to go after.


Asik was more of a post defender, his size alone mattered. Dieng doesn't have that size. I think with the big turnover in the bench, we need an offensive spark plug off the bench more than another help defender.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Asik was more of a post defender, his size alone mattered. Dieng doesn't have that size. I think with the big turnover in the bench, we need an offensive spark plug off the bench more than another help defender.



Who is going to be an "offensive spark plug" that can actually be employed next season at #20?


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

yodurk said:


> I like alot of these guys...except I'm not high on Gobert or Giannis. Both guys are getting drafted solely on physical upside, and are way too raw with their skill level and readiness to handle the physical grind of an NBA season.
> 
> I particularly like Caldwell-Pope because he has some nice skills that should translate well to the NBA, such as the ability to catch and shoot from 3-pt land, fast in the open floor, and legit SG size at 6'6.


I am not in love with Gobert, and I feel like I appropriately downgraded him moving him out of the Olynyk/Adams/Plumlee tier. I have seen him go as high as #7 and as low as #25 on draft boards.

The way I was viewing my board, the tier 1 guys (Caldwell-Pope, Olynyk, Adams, Plumlee) have starter potential with me liking Caldwell-Pope the best out of those 4. The three bigs are more interchangeable, but the order is my preference at the time.

The tier 2 guys I have listed (Gobert, Dieng, and Withey) have a NBA skill, but probably will not amount to be more than rotation players. The order of this grouping is interchangable.

The tier 3 guys are more likely reserves. I definitely prefer Rice Jr. and Crabbe to Giannis, but there wasn't really another guy ahead of Giannis where I favor "win now" over his potential. Having said that, I would actually add Tony Snell to this grouping as well.

I am not a big Hardaway Jr. guy. I watched a lot of Michigan games and his game just screams end of the bench rotation guy at the NBA level to me at least. I am also not a big Oladipo fan compared to where draft boards have him either. He'll be a legitimate NBA starter, but I do not think he will amount to much more than that.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Asik was more of a post defender, his size alone mattered. Dieng doesn't have that size. I think with the big turnover in the bench, we need an offensive spark plug off the bench more than another help defender.


I don't deny the need for an offensive sparkplug, only the means of getting such a player. Nate Robinson would be nice to keep but he's likely going to take a better offer elsewhere, more than we are allowed to pay under the cap. #20 is a very tough spot to get that type of player. Why not a vet signing, much like how we got Nate last year?


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Who is going to be an "offensive spark plug" that can actually be employed next season at #20?


Well its not common but its also not super rare. Heck, Marshon Brooks was #25 and he was a decent offensive player until he got lost in the shuffle in Brooklyn. Kenneth Faried is a solid player who was drafted in the same draft, a pick before Brooks. Chandler Parsons, also came from that draft and in the second round.

I think some candidates are Tim Hardaway JR, Shane Larkin can play the Nate Robinson role, Tony Mitchell can be developed and maybe even Ledo.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Quoted are the list of guys the Bulls have had in to work out privately. There is also a longer list of guys a Bulls rep was live scouting throughout the NCAA season:
https://www.facebook.com/chicagobullsrumors/posts/533055123422550

If recent Paxson era history proves anything, we probably will not be selecting a guy that we have not scouted.



> May 20 (Workouts)
> Erick Green - Virginia Tech - Guard
> Kevin Parrom - Arizona - Shooting Guard
> Allen Crabbe - California - Shooting Guard
> ...


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Going back to my list on the other thread, here is the number of times they have been confirmed as scouted.

Player (times scouted)
1. Rudy Gobert (0 but international)
2. Giannis Adetokunbo (0 but international)
3. Sergey Karasev (0 but international)
4. Steven Adams (4)
5. Gorgui Dieng (4)
6. Tim Hardaway Jr (4)
7. Jeff Withey (2)
8. Mason Plumlee (5) 

Seems that these definitely are the reasonable suspects. I would dislike an Adetokunbo, Withey, and Hardaway Jr. selection though.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Rhyder - what don't you like about Withey? I didn't see much of him in college but when I did it seemed like he had solid natural timing/instincts as a shot blocker. Is he viewed as having a limited upside?


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Rhyder - what don't you like about Withey? I didn't see much of him in college but when I did it seemed like he had solid natural timing/instincts as a shot blocker. Is he viewed as having a limited upside?


The guy is a Chris Anderson type on D. He lets guys blow by him and uses his length to block shots. He is not a rim protector or a weak side shot blocker at the next level. He is not very athletic or have NBA size and this will be exposed in the NBA. I think it very likely that he will not have a place in the NBA after his rookie contract outside of being a minimum contract guy simply because he is a 7 footer and coachable.

The only offensive skill I like about him as a C is that he actually does have good hands. This was my biggest knock on Asik and why I was happy with the decision to keep Taj over him. Despite being an outstanding college shot blocker, I do not think he will come close to the impact that Asik has.

All that said, I don't think he is a terrible prospect and is worth a late first round or early second round pick. There just are a number of guys I like better than him.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Tony Snell. Don't know a lot about the guy, but I'm hearing good things.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Another second round talent goes to the Bulls. I have no clue what the Bulls are thinking right now. Plumlee, Mitchel and Dieng were all projected to be just flat out better than Snell. 

Snell is a good shooter with low upside, his floor is safe as he at the worst projects to be a solid role player. A plus shooter who does other things just well enough, but doesn't WOW at anything.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Surprising pick, I really didn't see it coming, though I don't really know much about Tony Snell either. Not really the most exciting pick. However I am willing to give it a chance since we need cheap wing depth as well as 3-pt shooters.

Positives:
- Very long for SG (6'7 w/ 7'0 wingspan, 8'10 standing reach)
- Beautiful 3-pt stroke, smooth and high-arching with deep range
- Moves well without the ball, solid at catch and shoot; will fit into our system well
- Very athletic...super fast and nice hops measured at combine
- High defensive potential, esp. under Thibs...given the length and athleticism
- Good bball IQ and some ball skills (nothing spectacular though)

Negatives
- Won't be a shot creator, just a shot maker at NBA level
- Skinny...needs to build some muscle weight to defend well in the NBA
- What's up w/ his paltry rebounding in college? A guy with that length and athletic ability should easily grab 5-6 rebounds per game, not 2.5! I worry that may be a symptom of an underlying flaw, e.g, fear of contact inside? lack of motor?


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

And here's the other thing...there was nobody left on the board that I'll care we missed out on. Gorgui Dieng was the closest thing to "my guy" but even there I know he's not much more than a backup center. Not a fan of Ricky Ledo. Not the least bit excited by guys like Tim Hardaway Jr. or Allen Crabbe. Snell does exactly what those guys do, but has the crazy length and athletic ability they don't.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Surprising pick, I really didn't see it coming, though I don't really know much about Tony Snell either. Not really the most exciting pick. However I am willing to give it a chance since we need cheap wing depth as well as 3-pt shooters.
> 
> Positives:
> - Very long for SG (6'7 w/ 7'0 wingspan, 8'10 standing reach)
> ...


I think the Negatives seem a bit candy coated IMO.

Hes VERY limited on offense, he absolutely cannot create for himself right now and at the NBA level will truly need to come off screens to be productive. While hes a solid shooter, but hes not one of those once in a great while shooters, so I would be careful to project this guy to be a consistent shot maker.

Hes a mid second round pick who raised his stock in shooting drills during workouts. I really think the Bulls could have had him in the second round but oh well, the Bulls have done a decent job of making low talent players into mediocre NBA players so I guess the jury is still out on this guy.

Also, very low upside when considering age, skill-set and projected MPG.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Ugh, Ryan Kelly who would have been a nice stretch 4 just went a pick before the Bulls in the second round.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Looks like they went with an other version of Kelly by drafting Florida's Erik Murphy.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> I think the Negatives seem a bit candy coated IMO.
> 
> Hes VERY limited on offense, he absolutely cannot create for himself right now and at the NBA level will truly need to come off screens to be productive. While hes a solid shooter, but hes not one of those once in a great while shooters, so I would be careful to project this guy to be a consistent shot maker.


Not necessarily, there are plenty of solid NBA players who can't create their own shot yet can still nail 3-pointers consistently and remain highly productive on offense. Danny Green, Kyle Korver, etc. The key with those guys versus others is the ability to move well off the ball and find their looks. All the scouting reports and videos I scrapped up show that Snell is terrific moving off the ball, and has a silky smooth 3-pt shot, in fact his shooting ability the first thing mentioned time and again. Granted that doesn't project into starter material but who was really expecting a starter of any kind out of this pick, and in this draft. I'll be happy if he becomes an off the ball shooting specialist as a backup 2/3, holds his own on D, and cracks the rotation. That's decent value for a #20 pick historically.

Let me put this another way: a far worse pick would be trying to snag a "shot creating" SG like Ricky Ledo as a late 1st rounder. IMO, it's a big mistake trying to snag guys who need the ball to be effective, unless that player is a point guard or a supreme star talent like Lebron or Durant.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Not necessarily, there are plenty of solid NBA players who can't create their own shot yet can still nail 3-pointers consistently and remain highly productive on offense. Danny Green, Kyle Korver, etc. The key with those guys versus others is the ability to move well off the ball and find their looks.


I get what you are saying, but Green and Korver were MUCH better shooters than Snell and at a higher level in college. One knock on Snell was his motor or desire to improve, I just don't know how much better a guy like Snell can get, especially when considering his physical tools, shooting stroke and the poor competition he faced. Snell did not raise his game and was very inconsistent. 



> All the scouting reports and videos I scrapped up show that Snell is terrific moving off the ball, and has a silky smooth 3-pt shot, in fact his shooting ability the first thing mentioned time and again. Granted that doesn't project into starter material but who was really expecting a starter of any kind out of this pick, and in this draft. I'll be happy if he becomes an off the ball shooting specialist as a backup 2/3, holds his own on D, and cracks the rotation. That's decent value for a #20 pick historically.


Thats fine, I really can't argue with the idea that a role player is a win at pick 20 and above. But, I really expected the Bulls to swing for the fences, to draft a player who has more potential than anything else.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> I get what you are saying, but Green and Korver were MUCH better shooters than Snell and at a higher level in college. One knock on Snell was his motor or desire to improve, I just don't know how much better a guy like Snell can get, especially when considering his physical tools, shooting stroke and the poor competition he faced. Snell did not raise his game and was very inconsistent.


Well, it's hard to predict what will exactly translate to the NBA level. Though I watched about 5 different Snell videos last night and he really does have a pretty 3-pt stroke; very soft and high arching shot, not flat in the least, and it went in nearly 40% of the time over his past 2 college seasons. Might not be a Korver level of accuracy but certainly well above average and good enough to be a shooting specialist, and I certainly wouldn't call him limited offensively when he has a bonafide offensive skill that should translate. The fact that he gets alot of those as catch and shoot opportunities while moving w/out the ball is really encouraging too b/c that's similar to what he'll need to do for the Bulls in order to score. 

He appears to have all the tools to be a solid 2-way NBA wing. I agree there may be concern about his motor (probably the biggest red flag about him), however he's in a good situation with Thibs coaching him and playing with Rose that he's as likely to maximize his talent here as anywhere else.




> Thats fine, I really can't argue with the idea that a role player is a win at pick 20 and above. But, I really expected the Bulls to swing for the fences, to draft a player who has more potential than anything else.


I won't call it a homerun by any stretch. Though it's a net positive addition, IMO, fits a need (backup 2/3, 3-pt shooting), and brings some raw talent to the team that might evolve into something. Every team needs role players and you're not gonna do much better than that in a crummy draft picking at #20.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

As for Erik Murphy...it's obviously a "meh" pick as were all the 2nd rounders, however I like the Bulls mindset here and Murphy brings 1 niche skill to the table that will almost definitely translate. They were a subpar 3-pt shooting team and we snagged two outstanding shooters. Murphy shot 45% on 3's with high volume which is outstanding. He's got a legit PF body as well (6'10, 9'0 standing reach, very strong). His main problem is athletic ability. Cue the Matt Bonner comparisons. I doubt he'll see floor time, though in spurts I could see pick and pop ability with Rose where Murphy can help stretch the floor with his shooting.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

personally i am ok with this selection,

he plays smart , tough defensively and should be able to make it in the nba off his shooting alone

if i had my druthers they would have swung for the fences and gone after a 2 who had star ability , but since i dont believe the bulls culture is any good at developing stars i cant fault them for swinging low and getting someone who should produce relatively quickly


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Not sure if Dime Magazine's recent article on Snell has been mentioned here:

Link


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

Thanks for the link to the Dime article on Tony Snell. It seems Tony has is at least motivated enough to learn what to say to a reporter. Unfortunately the article does not mention "hard" questions about topics like his weak rebounding or seeming inability to create his own shot. 

Let us hope that a combination of an NBA paycheck and a professional coaching staff can do more to motivate Tony Snell than anything in his college career did. I think that if he works on his game he could be a nice surprise. At least he does seem willing to play defense.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Really nice video of an Erik Murphy predraft workout below. This guy's shot is MONEY. Just draining those deep jumpers one after another, and nothing but net on all of them. Backed up by that 45% on almost 5 attempts per game in college. Worst case scenario, are we looking at Steve Novak production? 6'10 with that caliber of 3-pt shot is going to make it into a rotation, IMO, just like Novak. Now how much he plays under Thibs, that largely depends on how well he can defend. His frame is pretty good as a PF/C type but whether he can demonstrate the anticipation/technique to overcome his lack of mobility on defense, that will dictate if he gets any burn. (not getting my hopes up)


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Fergus said:


> the article does not mention "hard" questions about topics like his weak rebounding or seeming inability to create his own shot.


Yeah his poor rebounding is really strange. At the college level, a guy with an 8'10 standing reach, his quickness, and 36" vertical should easily grab 4-5 boards per game, and that would be on the low side. Many guys with those physical abilities grab 7-8 boards in college. His 2-3 boards is just anemic. I'd love to know the story behind that, e.g., fear of going inside? teammates grabbing boards? their team's defensive system?

In any case, my gut instinct is that Snell will excel more as a SG, rather than SF. His lack of rebounding should be more easily masked at SG and his length/quickness gives a real advantage over most opposing SGs.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

It's clear to me that Murphy is essentially a "Build your Own Vlad" kit. It seems that Vlad was a bit of a disappointment to Thibodeau and therefore rotted on the bench. Mahybe the kid will be more useful.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

Not disappointed with the draft, the Bulls have proven to know what to do with these late draft picks. With as bad as this draft has been, getting a rotation guy is pretty good. I don't expect much from Murphy, wouldn't be surprised if he's cut before the season starts, but he's essentially a Radmanovic replacement. Best case scenario, this guy is the next Steve Novak.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I'd actually be surprised if Murphy gets cut. It's easy to assume he'll get cut b/c so many 2nd rounders do, however keep in mind that in the new CBA, teams are looking more and more for cheap min salary players to round out the bottom tier of their rotation. I bet you'll see more 2nd rounders sign on than in the past. In Murphy's case, you know he brings 1 thing to the table this team needs and for less than $1M bucks. As transplant said, I think he will simply take Vlad's role as the stretch 4 / 3rd string PF.


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

Both Murphy and Snell should stick and provide much better shooting off of the bench then Rip and Rad could (at least by the end of the season). However, I predict that Murphy will have problems with the Bulls defensive emphasis and could end up glued to the end of the bench. The key will be seeing if his defense and rebounding significantly improve. However, if he can improve, there is at a chance that Murphy can end up being a nice pickup for such a late pick.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I have a feeling with the Bulls, Murphy will stick, but I can't see him playing unless it's garbage time. Which is no knock on him, but rather depth/coaching style. 

Love the Snell pick... The wing position is by far the Bulls weakest position. They ranked high last year in post production, and have good depth with Taj... A backup center would have been nice, but that can addressed much easier in FA... Hopefully Snell can develop into a nice rotation player that can provide a good combo of offense and defense, as opposed to what we've had in the past (brewer /korver) where it's either offense OR defense. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Fergus said:


> Both Murphy and Snell should stick and provide much better shooting off of the bench then Rip and Rad could (at least by the end of the season). However, I predict that Murphy will have problems with the Bulls defensive emphasis and could end up glued to the end of the bench. The key will be seeing if his defense and rebounding significantly improve. However, if he can improve, there is at a chance that Murphy can end up being a nice pickup for such a late pick.


I don't think anyone is expecting Murphy to be more than a 13th man at this point. Even Murphy himself...


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)




----------

