2017 NBA Draft

[Thebo]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Was impressed by Markkanen against USC. He can shoot. Does he fit on the court with Barnes?

I do not think there is a big issue offensively. Question is, where Barnes will get his future minutes at? If Barnes is going to play more at 4 then I do not think Markkanen has enough defensive presence to play at center. He is young though.

I like Markkanen a lot, but just can not see how he would be perfect with Barnes.

[Bryan_Wilson]

I go back and forth with Markkanen. On the one hand, Barnes does play best taking advantage of 4's. But on the other hand the NBA has become so position-less that I'm not sure it matters. And since Mavs keep running high screens with Barnes getting mismatches with guards it just makes me think even more that it won't matter. As long as Markkanen can hold his own in the post on defense and rebound it would fit I think.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

I go back and forth with Markkanen. On the one hand, Barnes does play best taking advantage of 4's. But on the other hand the NBA has become so position-less that I'm not sure it matters. And since Mavs keep running high screens with Barnes getting mismatches with guards it just makes me think even more that it won't matter. As long as Markkanen can hold his own in the post on defense and rebound it would fit I think.

I've been diving into the players in the 5-10 range the last few weeks... mostly because I see how determined the Mavs are to muck up this situation. Markkanen from a talent perspective seems like a lock at this point, but I do question his fit.

Jonathan Isaac as of late has been really coming along, and he has the versatility to move between the 3 and 4. His biggest knock is the "thin frame", but after watching KD for the last 10 years I would be willing to take the risk. He isn't the scorer of a KD, but he could evolve into a Kevin Garnett type. Personally I would take Isaac > Tatum or Jackson. Tatums ceiling seems on the low end, and Jackson has zero range. Both guys currently are projecting to go ahead of Isaac.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

I've been diving into the players in the 5-10 range the last few weeks... mostly because I see how determined the Mavs are to muck up this situation. Markkanen from a talent perspective seems like a lock at this point, but I do question his fit.

Jonathan Isaac as of late has been really coming along, and he has the versatility to move between the 3 and 4. His biggest knock is the "thin frame", but after watching KD for the last 10 years I would be willing to take the risk. He isn't the scorer of a KD, but he could evolve into a Kevin Garnett type. Personally I would take Isaac > Tatum or Jackson. Tatums ceiling seems on the low end, and Jackson has zero range. Both guys currently are projecting to go ahead of Isaac.

Yeah I personally think Tatum looks way too much like Barnes in terms of where he scores on the floor. I think that would be a bigger worry on fit than Markkanen. Jackson scares me as well. Seems he scares a lot of ppl on here. I'd be happy if Isaac was the player we ended up with. I wouldn't be ecstatic like Smith or Fultz but I'd be happy for sure.

[Bryan_Wilson]

http://www.foxsports.com/nba/story/5...vericks-012117

Edit-
I should add I don't take anything Chad Ford says seriously. I have no clue why he's the Mel Kiper of Basketball drafts with ESPN. No idea who Chris Stone is but he can't be worse than Ford... right?

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Funny, I've mentioned Rabb a few times. The draft boards underrate him big time.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Funny, I've mentioned Rabb a few times. The draft boards underrate him big time.

They may underrate him, but in my opinion if we walk away with him it is an incredible waste of opportunity for the Mavs. Nothing about Rabb makes me feel like he has the ceiling for a #1 franchise player which is what we have to walk away with.

Fultz, Smith jr. Ball = TIER 1 Mavs

Isaac, Markkanen, Ntilikina = Tier 2 although I do question Markkanen fit with Barnes.

[rimrocker]

Just curious....if comes down to Smith or Ball which one do you take?
I'm thinking Ball might be a great fit with Barnes, Matthews, Curry and Dirk. He might be the most NBA ready too.

On another note, what do you think it would take to get WCS from the Kings?
Would Anderson/Protected Future Pick work?
If Barnes is our future PF then I'd like to have an athletic rim protector with size at center.

A core of Fultz(if we're lucky)/Curry/Matthews(eventually DFS)/Barnes/WCS would be a nice young core with pretty nice chemistry potential to build on.
Considering Barnes is 24 and Curry 26, trading for a guy like WCS would put us a year ahead in the rebuild process....much like when we traded a pick for Nash (although that pick turned out to be Marion).

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by rimrocker

Just curious....if comes down to Smith or Ball which one do you take?

http://www.draftexpress.com/video/12523/

His weaknesses are more glaring than any of the PG's IMO.

[BPo001]

Originally Posted by rimrocker

Just curious....if comes down to Smith or Ball which one do you take?
I'm thinking Ball might be a great fit with Barnes, Matthews, Curry and Dirk. He might be the most NBA ready too.

On another note, what do you think it would take to get WCS from the Kings?
Would Anderson/Protected Future Pick work?
If Barnes is our future PF then I'd like to have an athletic rim protector with size at center.

A core of Fultz(if we're lucky)/Curry/Matthews(eventually DFS)/Barnes/WCS would be a nice young core with pretty nice chemistry potential to build on.
Considering Barnes is 24 and Curry 26, trading for a guy like WCS would put us a year ahead in the rebuild process....much like when we traded a pick for Nash (although that pick turned out to be Marion).

Smith. I'm running to the podium if he's available when we pick (which I highly doubt he will be).

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by rimrocker

Just curious....if comes down to Smith or Ball which one do you take?
I'm thinking Ball might be a great fit with Barnes, Matthews, Curry and Dirk. He might be the most NBA ready too.

On another note, what do you think it would take to get WCS from the Kings?
Would Anderson/Protected Future Pick work?
If Barnes is our future PF then I'd like to have an athletic rim protector with size at center.

A core of Fultz(if we're lucky)/Curry/Matthews(eventually DFS)/Barnes/WCS would be a nice young core with pretty nice chemistry potential to build on.
Considering Barnes is 24 and Curry 26, trading for a guy like WCS would put us a year ahead in the rebuild process....much like when we traded a pick for Nash (although that pick turned out to be Marion).

Hard to argue against Smith Jr. After watching last nights game.

For recap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dInkJ0CzYpo

That move at 1:40. Wow.

[tap2390]

Wow we really need a top three pick.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by tap2390

Wow we really need a top three pick.

Agreed. After watching Cuban stake our entire future on free agency the last few years, and walk away empty handed, justifying NOT placing yourself in the best position for a top 3 pick this year is weak.

I get the "culture" argument, but thats for the players and coach. Nothing wrong with taking the Celtics approach.... especially when your half way through the season and one of the worst records in the NBA.

Then to compound the issue, you have a draft that will most likely comprise of 5+ future all nba 1st teamers. Fultz and Smith Jr. (Barring injury) are sure lock franchise players. Ball has some questions, but his upside is very intriguing. He has that "it" factor of winning that is hard to find. Then the next 3-4 players on the list are all guys who could go number 1 in most drafts.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Hard to argue against Smith Jr. After watching last nights game.

For recap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dInkJ0CzYpo

That move at 1:40. Wow.

Chris Paul starter kit.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

What's great about those highlights is that Smith was actually smooth and crafty versus just using mindless speed and athleticism. He knows exactly where he needs to be on offense to get the ball in the hoop. That says Rick Carlisle guy all over it.

[rimrocker]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Hard to argue against Smith Jr. After watching last nights game.

For recap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dInkJ0CzYpo

That move at 1:40. Wow.

I tend to agree but NBADraft.net has Ball projected to be the #1 overall pick in the 2017 mock draft and I've seen several others having Ball going before Smith.

http://www.nbadraft.net/2017mock_draft

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2017/

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2017/

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...gurus-2nd-mock

http://hoopshype.com/2017/01/06/nba-mock-draft-2017/

http://www.nbadraftroom.com/p/2017-nba-mock-draft.html

http://www.fanragsports.com/nba/2017...son-edition/3/

http://www.chicagonow.com/daily-chic...draft/#image/1

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Well Ball seems almost laughably underrated by Mavs fans. Sure, his shot is weird, but they go in. And he has definitely improved as a player as the season has gone on. He looks a lot more like Kidd these days than Rubio. You can see the self-confidence in him that is key to being an elite player in the NBA. He can change pace, pass, shoot, rebound, and defend with any guard on the college level. Hard to argue with his intangibles.

I'd still go with Smith if I had to pick one, but Ball looks like the real deal. And he would be a really good fit with Barnes.

[Bryan_Wilson]

I'm not worried about Ball's shot rly. It's ugly but it goes in. It's his lack of ability to penetrate against anyone remotely close to NBA caliber so far. I've only watched highlights but that highlight breakdown of the game against Kentucky rly is the main concern for me. You can chalk it up to a bad game, or you can be worried that he couldn't beat his man off the dribble and break a defense down that has the caliber of player Kentucky has. He was shooting step back 28-30 footers. That's the kind of thing Wes Matthews does because he can't beat his man. I don't want that from our pg.

Edit-
And to DH's point about his defense. I'm not sure his defense would be great at the next level if he lacks foot speed. I'm not sure what his lateral quickness is but at the pg position in today's NBA you can't have a question there. I wouldn't hate him if we picked him I just have some real concerns about him aside from his ugly shot.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

I'm not worried about Ball's shot rly. It's ugly but it goes in. It's his lack of ability to penetrate against anyone remotely close to NBA caliber so far. I've only watched highlights but that highlight breakdown of the game against Kentucky rly is the main concern for me. You can chalk it up to a bad game, or you can be worried that he couldn't beat his man off the dribble and break a defense down that has the caliber of player Kentucky has. He was shooting step back 28-30 footers. That's the kind of thing Wes Matthews does because he can't beat his man. I don't want that from our pg.

Edit-
And to DH's point about his defense. I'm not sure his defense would be great at the next level if he lacks foot speed. I'm not sure what his lateral quickness is but at the pg position in today's NBA you can't have a question there. I wouldn't hate him if we picked him I just have some real concerns about him aside from his ugly shot.

I think his size makes up for this lack of foot speed as he would be able to guard 2s. He would be a perfect fit in Rick's three guard lineups.

It also makes up for his lack of penetration as he is able to see above defenders to make passes. I will say though that penetration is his biggest weakness. His game against Arizona though showed he at least CAN penetrate. He was spectactular in that game against a team that was 17-2.

And honestly, the foot speed is less visible when he is running his fast breaks which are this bread and butter IMO. Runs breaks I'd say as well as any pg in this draft.

I just think at the end of the day you can't go wrong with Ball/Fultz/Smith who are basically locks for 1-3.

[rimrocker]

I think the leadership that Ball would bring intrigues me the most. It's been a hell of a long time since we've had a great floor leader and I think he could be one for us for a decade or longer. We seem to have several young skilled players (and Dirk) that he could setup and as DHWS stated he can guard the 2 which could make him and Curry a really nice backcourt duo.

Smith is obviously more explosive and will certainly break down defenses but his style scares the hell out of me when it comes to injury.

I agree that all 3 (Fultz, Smith and Ball) will make impacts in the league and I would probably take Smith before Ball but I certainly won't be disappointed if Ball is the one we end up with.

[hayth.james.g]

At this point it would be an absolute home run to land any 3 for us considering we are committed to blowing this opportunity. I'll also add that if Isaac continues on this upward trajectory hewill get serious consideration in the top 5. He has been dominant in the past few games... Big games at that.

[MavzMan]

Quote from hoopshype:
"I have asked scouts about Wiggins and the thing I’ve heard over and over again is that if he had any kind of killer instinct, he’s an absolute superstar. But he just hasn’t shown any indication of that. – via ESPN"

Talent alone will not guarantee that you become a superstar. We need someone that has "it" where "it" is a lot of things ...
- desire to win
- desire to improve
- desire to lead
- desire to follow the coach and game plan
- desire to make your teammates better sometimes at your own superstar expense
- courage to step up in key moments and also deliver
- desire to study the game and how it's evolved
- desire to improve your BBIQ to take the game to the next level

Most of this is not visible from 10 minute youtube videos. I just hope that we get a high enough pick to where we get our #1 choice overall no matter if it's 1 through 5. Obviously we get that if we get the #1 pick, but if you look at the last 20 years of first overall picks, I would say that 40% of them were either busts or not franchise players to build around. So making the right pick is actually more important than getting the #1 pick.

[rimrocker]

Originally Posted by MavzMan

Quote from hoopshype:
"I have asked scouts about Wiggins and the thing I’ve heard over and over again is that if he had any kind of killer instinct, he’s an absolute superstar. But he just hasn’t shown any indication of that. – via ESPN"

Talent alone will not guarantee that you become a superstar. We need someone that has "it" where "it" is a lot of things ...
- desire to win
- desire to improve
- desire to lead
- desire to follow the coach and game plan
- desire to make your teammates better sometimes at your own superstar expense
- courage to step up in key moments and also deliver
- desire to study the game and how it's evolved
- desire to improve your BBIQ to take the game to the next level

Most of this is not visible from 10 minute youtube videos. I just hope that we get a high enough pick to where we get our #1 choice overall no matter if it's 1 through 5. Obviously we get that if we get the #1 pick, but if you look at the last 20 years of first overall picks, I would say that 40% of them were either busts or not franchise players to build around. So making the right pick is actually more important than getting the #1 pick.

I think back to guys like Stromile Swift, Kwame Brown, Michael Olowokandi, Marcus Liberty and several others who were hyped up but turned out to be complete busts mainly because they just didn't have it between the ears.
We simply can't miss in this draft or it will set us back. We need some maturity and an NBA ready guy who can fit in with Barnes and Curry who are obviously going to be offensive catalysts going forward.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by MavzMan

Quote from hoopshype:
"I have asked scouts about Wiggins and the thing I’ve heard over and over again is that if he had any kind of killer instinct, he’s an absolute superstar. But he just hasn’t shown any indication of that. – via ESPN"

Talent alone will not guarantee that you become a superstar. We need someone that has "it" where "it" is a lot of things ...
- desire to win
- desire to improve
- desire to lead
- desire to follow the coach and game plan
- desire to make your teammates better sometimes at your own superstar expense
- courage to step up in key moments and also deliver
- desire to study the game and how it's evolved
- desire to improve your BBIQ to take the game to the next level

Most of this is not visible from 10 minute youtube videos. I just hope that we get a high enough pick to where we get our #1 choice overall no matter if it's 1 through 5. Obviously we get that if we get the #1 pick, but if you look at the last 20 years of first overall picks, I would say that 40% of them were either busts or not franchise players to build around. So making the right pick is actually more important than getting the #1 pick.

Love the discussion of the other parts of a star's game

1) Skill
2) physical tools
3) Drive
4) Maturity

Lots of guys have 1/2 and it's what all of the lottery projections are based on.

3/4 are hard to spot as a scout but at least as important if not way more important, which is why we get undrafted guys like Matthews, Bruce Bowen, Udonis Haslem, Ben Wallace, and second rounders like Whiteside, Marc Gasol, Green and Ginobli.

[sefant77]

Originally Posted by rimrocker

I think the leadership that Ball would bring intrigues me the most. It's been a hell of a long time since we've had a great floor leader and I think he could be one for us for a decade or longer. We seem to have several young skilled players (and Dirk) that he could setup and as DHWS stated he can guard the 2 which could make him and Curry a really nice backcourt duo.

Smith is obviously more explosive and will certainly break down defenses but his style scares the hell out of me when it comes to injury.

I agree that all 3 (Fultz, Smith and Ball) will make impacts in the league and I would probably take Smith before Ball but I certainly won't be disappointed if Ball is the one we end up with.

In the new NBA you dont need a true floor leader anymore, the old PG play is
pretty much dead. They changed the rules so much, its all about the driving to the basket and drawing fouls. Offense is drive & finish or dish.

Westbrook and Harden arent playmakers or old school floor leaders....10+ APG just because the new rules makes it so easy for them.

After Dirk retires im probably done with the NBA anyway, i hate how it developed the past 5-6 years..

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by sefant77

In the new NBA you dont need a true floor leader anymore, the old PG play is
pretty much dead. They changed the rules so much, its all about the driving to the basket and drawing fouls. Offense is drive & finish or dish.

Westbrook and Harden arent playmakers or old school floor leaders....10+ APG just because the new rules makes it so easy for them.

After Dirk retires im probably done with the NBA anyway, i hate how it developed the past 5-6 years..

I'll probably still follow the Mavs, but completely agree with the rest. SuperStars can always swing the pendulum and create their own niche (Shaq made beefy centers a thing. Nash brought back the PG as playmaker, Dirk brought in the era of PFs with range and mobility instead of inside post guys.)

But Silver wants a fast and exciting league. He's said as much and every policy and reffing change he's done has made it harder for defensive guys and easier for shooters and drivers. There isn't a place for a pass-first floor general when guards and mobile forwards have such an advantage on defenders. It's why Fultz, Smith, and Ntilinka have such potential. Ball is a great PG for the 2005-2015 NBA , but Fultz, Smith, and Frank are built for the future NBA and Ball may never be a good enough shooter to play on a good team.

This league has quickly become an offense-dominated league by creating such a reffing advantage for guards and contact. It's also why I hate Harden-- he was the first to really manipulate that rule change when the league shifted. He's a one-trick pony but he absolutely adapted to the shift. He was the vanguard of the league shift.

Just say no to Ball. I'd wager $20 he'll be playing less than 10mpg in 4-5 years.

[rimrocker]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

This league has quickly become an offense-dominated league by creating such a reffing advantage for guards and contact. It's also why I hate Harden-- he was the first to really manipulate that rule change when the league shifted. He's a one-trick pony but he absolutely adapted to the shift. He was the vanguard of the league shift.

I would argue that Wade was the vanguard but your point is well taken on Ball.

When teams witnessed how the Heat were virtually given the championship in 2006 by the refs, the shift in the league began imo.

[rimrocker]

Originally Posted by sefant77

In the new NBA you dont need a true floor leader anymore, the old PG play is
pretty much dead. They changed the rules so much, its all about the driving to the basket and drawing fouls. Offense is drive & finish or dish.

Westbrook and Harden arent playmakers or old school floor leaders....10+ APG just because the new rules makes it so easy for them.

After Dirk retires im probably done with the NBA anyway, i hate how it developed the past 5-6 years..

I'm wondering if Anderson could ever develop into that type of player. If he had better handles (especially to the right) and could hit the 3 more consistently he definitely has the body and ability to finish and get to the line frequently.
It would take a lot of work but he might be the closest we currently have. Barnes and Curry are too much finesse players to virtually "live at the line" so to say.

[saclare]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I'll probably still follow the Mavs, but completely agree with the rest. SuperStars can always swing the pendulum and create their own niche (Shaq made beefy centers a thing. Nash brought back the PG as playmaker, Dirk brought in the era of PFs with range and mobility instead of inside post guys.)

But Silver wants a fast and exciting league. He's said as much and every policy and reffing change has made it harder for defensive guys and easier for shooters and drivers. There isn't a place for a pass-first floor general when guards and mobile forwards have such an advantage on defenders. It's why Fultz, Smith, and Ntilinka have such potential. Ball is a great PG for the 2005-2015 NBA , but Fultz, Smith, and Frank are built for the future NBA and Ball may never be a good enough gah shooter to play on a good team.

This league has quickly become an offense-dominated league by creating such a reffing advantage for guards and contact. It's also why I hate Harden-- he was the first to really manipulate that rule change when the league shifted. He's a one-trick pony but he absolutely adapted to the shift. He was the vanguard of the league shift.

Just say no to Ball. I'd wager $20 he'll be playing less than 10mpg in 4-5 years.

I have to politely disagree on Ball. I will agree that Fultz and Smith will most likely be better PGs, but Ball's style of play definitely has a place in the league. The tempo he plays with and the passing alone will at least put him on Ricky Rubio level. The kid gets a lot of flack for his shot, whether it's form or slower release, but the end result doesn't lie. The ball goes in 43.1% of the time so far in college. Granted, there's always the adjustment to NBA range, but he's got that, too.

I definitely hear your side of the argument, though. Out of the three, he has a higher bust percentage. However, I'd take him 10 times over Ntilinka.

[sefant77]

Ricky Rubio is the perfect example. Great defender, one of the best passer and floor general and he still is just a borderline star in the league...he came 10-15 years to late in the nba

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by rimrocker

I would argue that Wade was the vanguard but your point is well taken on Ball.

When teams witnessed how the Heat were virtually given the championship in 2006 by the refs, the shift in the league began imo.

Yeah, forgot about Wade. His 2005-2006 performance was before the league really codified how players were called so he was mostly an outlier at the time, but he was certainly the first guy in modern record who just cannonballed into other players and got the calls without a lot of effort to make the shot.

Before him, Iverson was aggressive on the drive, but his game was about making interior shots against bigs despite contact-- kinda like JJB does. Wade and then Harden built their game around creating contact while pantomiming putting a shot up to get FTs. Making those layups was only a bonus.

Wade basically punched a hole through the rules and Stern just normalized it for the sake of higher scoring games. 2006 we were still seeing defensive slogs (particularly in the East). Harden just ran with it and recreated his game when he got to Houston to completely manipulate the new rules/norms.

[sefant77]

04-05 they introduced new hand checking rules and the entire reffing about this was still a mess in 05-06.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Wade will forever be my most hated NBA player because of '06 and I'll forever laugh my ass off at him for needing a wheel chair for his arm injury. Having said that... he actually shoots the ball well from mid range and finishes around the rim and at least looks to score first with a secondary of getting to the line(or used to) and plays defense. Harden is the most disgusting player to watch because if not for him hunting for ways to get free throws by not looking to actually make a shot but rather bait the refs into ft's... He's an average shooter who is a turnover machine and is one of the most lazy defenders I've seen.

[Robillion]

Back on Ball - I feel like it is probably an uneducated basketball opinion. But, I can't help but see him as a total spaz on the court. It is hard for me to imagine him as a pro player, let alone a top PG in the NBA based simply on the way he moves. Yeah, his passing ability is undeniable and he can obviously shoot from long distance. But, something about him just makes me think like none of it will translate. His game looks a little too fast, and not in a good way like with Dennis, but in the way like every other guard we have drafted in recent memory.... Or maybe I just think he looks weird. I don't know.

[MavzMan]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Wade will forever be my most hated NBA player because of '06

You had me at hello.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

I will say that watching Yogi break down defenses last night has changed my perspective on this draft. Mavs need a PG that can attack and win the first step off the dribble. That certainly isn't Ball.

And that brings me back to Fox who is arguably the quickest player of the pgs in the top ten. And I don't think we'll be picking high enough to get Smith. Fox would pair very well with Curry in the back court.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

I will say that watching Yogi break down defenses last night has changed my perspective on this draft. Mavs need a PG that can attack and win the first step off the dribble. That certainly isn't Ball.

And that brings me back to Fox who is arguably the quickest player of the pgs in the top ten. And I don't think we'll be picking high enough to get Smith. Fox would pair very well with Curry in the back court.

Well here is the vid of him vs UCLA and Ball. I think I posted the one of Ball vs Kentucky a while back.
http://www.draftexpress.com/video/12522/

I'm scared of Ball and Fox for different reasons but I'd be fine with either if we were not in the top 5. I'm coming around more on Frank also. Right now I'd rather take Frank over both Ball and Fox.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Well here is the vid of him vs UCLA and Ball. I think I posted the one of Ball vs Kentucky a while back.
http://www.draftexpress.com/video/12522/

I'm scared of Ball and Fox for different reasons but I'd be fine with either if we were not in the top 5. I'm coming around more on Frank also. Right now I'd rather take Frank over both Ball and Fox.

To me the biggest issue with Fox is his slight frame (same as Isaac). Being injury prone could be an issue.

Still, he is a very good rebounder for a pg, good defender, good athleticism, and very quick. His lack of shooting will be made up for by Curry, Barnes, and Matthews.

But knowing the Mavs, they'd probably go for Frank.

[rimrocker]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

I will say that watching Yogi break down defenses last night has changed my perspective on this draft. Mavs need a PG that can attack and win the first step off the dribble. That certainly isn't Ball.

And that brings me back to Fox who is arguably the quickest player of the pgs in the top ten. And I don't think we'll be picking high enough to get Smith. Fox would pair very well with Curry in the back court.

I know Curry isn't a true PG, and not sure if Yogi will ever be a starting caliber PG, but if one of the top tier PGs are not on the board I'm beginning to be somewhat interested going big with someone like Lauri Markkanen.
Has a smooth looking stroke and range for a 7 footer and seems to be much more athletic than Dirk. I think Dirk would be great for his development.

In other words, I'm beginning to be more concerned about our center situation next season than PG. I'm hoping that Curry will continue to improve his PG skills and maybe we'll get damn lucky with Ferrell or Jackson. Rick really needs to keep playing the young guys because we're beginning to see some of the benefits of giving them some quality PT.

[Thebo]

I have liked Markkanen for some time. I still believe in taking reliable PG. If Mavs somehow end up drafting outside top 5 and fourth team to pick PG, then it is understandable to consider Markkanen.

It is also nice to speculate how Mavs' competition is drafting. I find it hard to believe that Lakers pick PG. Lakers have Clarkson and DeAngelo Russell. Are Phoenix going to pick PG over Bledsoe? Well, they can slide him or PG to shooting guard position. Lakers and Suns seem to be only teams that may end up not drafting PG.