Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Agreed
Suns have 6th pick and 32nd pick in 2019 draft.
- Thread starter Yuma
- Start date
Like dump Warren and Jackson for nothing other than the "privilege" of throwing $15-17 million per season away on Cory Joseph.
SunnyBaller
All Star
There's definitely a good chance of them doing something stupid , but I'd rather then do it now rather than later so I have time to accept it
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Reaching for Clarke at 6 would also be something stupid...
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,687
- Reaction score
- 73,988
Gina Mizell has put up a number of tweets about Clarke. I'm starting to wonder if these are hints.
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
BC867
Long time Phoenician!
Of course, I agree with your last sentence. My point was that, with the Suns history of futility in a decade of annual
"futures", they finally need to show substantial improvement now.
Or to put that another way, build on a strong foundation that features positive results that we have not seen in a
long time.
It isn't about a million dollar car vs. a Kia. It is about a billion dollar sports franchise that has been an embarrassment.
Sarver and his gang, all the fired GM's and Head Coaches who are still collecting and the million dollar players are driving
the million dollar cars. The fans are riding only in the Kia.
BTW, if only Suns management had the wherewithal to provide the same level of quality that Hyundai/Kia has achieved.
Chrysler and Nissan should have that level of quality.
Metaphors are clever, but they won't get the Suns into the playoffs.
hcsilla
ASFN Lifer
White has a dangerously high bust-potential.
He can run, hit some crazy step-back jumpers and find the open man in transition. It's scary if that's all what your #6 offers.
I would stay away from White.
Garland, Culver and Hunter (probably in that order) are much better options.
Like I said, I believe his ceiling is Leandro Barbosa. That being said, I would take White over Culver, but not over Garland or especially not over Hunter.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 38,469
- Reaction score
- 19,416
Absolutely, I've been saying it for awhile. He has star potential but he's far more likely to bust IMO. I disagree on Garland though, I wouldn't touch him, certainly not with a lottery pick regardless of how weak this draft is projected to be. I like Culver and Hunter for our pick (or maybe Clarke if they're gone).
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,687
- Reaction score
- 73,988
Jarrett Culver confirms he worked out for the Suns.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...uns-lakers-knicks-cavaliers-bulls/1507679001/
https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...uns-lakers-knicks-cavaliers-bulls/1507679001/
As long as his middle initial isn't I.
hcsilla
ASFN Lifer
I take Culver over White without hesitation, moreover I think it is extremely unlikely that White goes ahead of Culver.
hcsilla
ASFN Lifer
Actually I don't really see the star potential either. He is too short, unpolished and not athletic enough, IMO to be considered as someone with star potential.
The sample is very small, I know but he is very polished and explosive, has a quick release and a nice-looking jumper, changes speed and goes to places easily where he wants to.
Me too, both seem quasi-(NBA-)veterans who stick to their strengths and play under control.
Culver looks like someone who can share the backcourt with Booker, while Hunter might offer an overall upgrade over Warren as a PF and can play as a full-time SF as well.
I'm not so high on Culver either. When I watch his film I'm left uninspired. I suppose he could pull a Paul Pierce and make me look stupid, but I just don't see that high of a ceiling with him.
I love that he can be a good Defender. I think he'll improve as a 3pt shooter. I like his length. He's got great character. But I hate the fit here. I don't see his role on this team. He suffers from being good at lots of things, but not great at anything.
Since his ceiling doesn't look that high and we already have Book and Bridges, I'd pass on Culver at #6.
White has concerns too. But when I watch his film I can at least see the makings of a potential lethal scorer with play making ability. I'd take White over Culver. I'd take White at #6.
hcsilla
ASFN Lifer
A Brogdon-like big combo G with good defense, secondary playmaking and dangerous (he need to improve heavily in this area) 3P-shooting.
I really like the Brogdon comp. And that's the problem. Brogdon is a good combo G. He's either a really good rotational back up guy to a quality PG and SG, or he's a starting SG with a stellar PG. But where does he fit here? Do you really see us winning anything with Brogdon starting at PG for us? I don't. And I like Brogdon. Heck, I like Culver. But I don't like either of them starting with Book.
That said, I'm not so hung up on ANY other player that I'd be that sad if we drafted Culver over him. He's going to be AT LEAST a solid rotational wing.
Honestly, I'd prefer trading back and getting Kabangele, or Fernando, or Bol. I see Kab as possible good rotation guy with a higher ceiling. Bruno would be a great back up C with Mark West potential to start. Bol just has an insane swing from floor to ceiling potential, so take a shot late.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 38,469
- Reaction score
- 19,416
I can see reasons to draft Garland but there is risk with just about every player and I think it's important to manage that risk especially when you are drafting in the lottery. Garland's meniscus history adds just enough risk IMO to drop him from the conversation at 6.
devilalum
Heavily Redacted
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2002
- Posts
- 16,776
- Reaction score
- 3,190
2/5
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,687
- Reaction score
- 73,988
I think the early picks after Barrett (likely #3) swing around Culver.
If Culver goes #4 or #5 there will be a point guard on the table (Garland or White) at #6. I think Garland goes #4. However, it would be interesting if Garland is there at their pick. It's hard to see them passing on him. I could see a trade down as well.
