Summer 2021 Fantasy Draft: Draft Thread

[Roy H.]

With the 12th pick of the 5th round, the Memphis Grizzlies select  Mikal Bridges.

Good fit with his shooting and defence alongside your plethora of offensive stars

This is something I've talked about with a couple of guys regarding the draft, and then also in the discussion about the IRL Nets.

Does adding a defensive stud make sense if your entire team is built around offense?  How much can one guy do on defense?  Would assets be better spent to maximizing the offense?  Adding facilitators and ultra-efficient finishers?

I think it depends. If it's a transformative defender at the 5 like Gobert, or Ben Wallace, I think it makes a big difference. That becomes less important on the perimeter, naturally, but I still like the idea of balance. Plus, Bridges is pretty handy with his efficiency

I added an edit above that clarified that elite defensive centers are individual difference makers.  I agree with you there.

Bridges is very efficient, but he's not much of a volume guy, and he doesn't add a ton rebounding or passing, either.

Jvalin and I had a similar conversation via PMs.  I'm just not sure if he adds a ton.  If you accept that an individual perimeter player surrounded by four sub-par defenders won't make much of a difference on a team's defense, then does it make sense to add a low volume shooter?  I don't think so.

You're making Bridges sound offensively incompetent - he's a hyper-efficient scorer and killer shooter. Sure, he's not the best creator in the world but he's not going to hold you back.

He won't hold you back, but he'll add less than probably two dozen players offensively, at least.  If his defense is marginalized, then is there a good reason to not go for the best offensive player available?

To over-simplify, at this point the die has been cast.  Some teams are offense-only, some are defense-oriented, and some go both ways.  This deep into the draft, I think that teams should play to their strengths.

I would look at it a bit differently with Mikal Bridges' offense. I would look at it in terms of efficiency rather than total scoring and total assists. Does he elevate my team's offensive efficiency as a fifth wheel and low volume offensive player more than a higher volume lower efficiency offensive player does?

That would be how I would look at his offense.

I would worry about how much a 5th option can add when he is standing in a queue behind Lillard, Towns, SGA and Randle. How many touches will that 5th option really get? How many shots?

A low volume high efficiency guy could add more to that lineup's offense than a higher volume but lower efficiency guy can.

In that light, I look at Mikal Bridges as a great fit offensively.

This is potentially true.  But, I'm not arguing for higher volume, lower efficiency.  I'm arguing for higher volume, roughly equal efficiency.

[Who]

With the 12th pick of the 5th round, the Memphis Grizzlies select  Mikal Bridges.

Good fit with his shooting and defence alongside your plethora of offensive stars

This is something I've talked about with a couple of guys regarding the draft, and then also in the discussion about the IRL Nets.

Does adding a defensive stud make sense if your entire team is built around offense?  How much can one guy do on defense?  Would assets be better spent to maximizing the offense?  Adding facilitators and ultra-efficient finishers?

I think it depends. If it's a transformative defender at the 5 like Gobert, or Ben Wallace, I think it makes a big difference. That becomes less important on the perimeter, naturally, but I still like the idea of balance. Plus, Bridges is pretty handy with his efficiency

I added an edit above that clarified that elite defensive centers are individual difference makers.  I agree with you there.

Bridges is very efficient, but he's not much of a volume guy, and he doesn't add a ton rebounding or passing, either.

Jvalin and I had a similar conversation via PMs.  I'm just not sure if he adds a ton.  If you accept that an individual perimeter player surrounded by four sub-par defenders won't make much of a difference on a team's defense, then does it make sense to add a low volume shooter?  I don't think so.

You're making Bridges sound offensively incompetent - he's a hyper-efficient scorer and killer shooter. Sure, he's not the best creator in the world but he's not going to hold you back.

He won't hold you back, but he'll add less than probably two dozen players offensively, at least.  If his defense is marginalized, then is there a good reason to not go for the best offensive player available?

To over-simplify, at this point the die has been cast.  Some teams are offense-only, some are defense-oriented, and some go both ways.  This deep into the draft, I think that teams should play to their strengths.

I would look at it a bit differently with Mikal Bridges' offense. I would look at it in terms of efficiency rather than total scoring and total assists. Does he elevate my team's offensive efficiency as a fifth wheel and low volume offensive player more than a higher volume lower efficiency offensive player does?

That would be how I would look at his offense.

I would worry about how much a 5th option can add when he is standing in a queue behind Lillard, Towns, SGA and Randle. How many touches will that 5th option really get? How many shots?

A low volume high efficiency guy could add more to that lineup's offense than a higher volume but lower efficiency guy can.

In that light, I look at Mikal Bridges as a great fit offensively.

This is potentially true.  But, I'm not arguing for higher volume, lower efficiency.  I'm arguing for higher volume, roughly equal efficiency.

I see 3 guys (all role players) you could make an argument for as better options offense-only at SF. Two strictly jump-shooters who do not offer the transition offense, 1 of the 2 offers comparable off-ball cutting, neither gets offensive rebounds (Bridges is good here as well) and neither gives you that extra passing. The 3rd guy gives you far more ball-handling and playmaking along with comparable outside shooting but not the transition offense or offensive rebounding.

I would take Mikal Bridges' offense over the other two. I believe his well-rounded repertoire makes him more consistent and dependable against the best of the best. That is without considering the superior defensive talent of Bridges over either one of them.

The third guy does have a case as possibly doing more to aid the team's offense than Bridges does. How much? And is it more than the defensive difference between the two? I am not sure how much it is given how far down the pecking order the 5th option will be for opportunities to be a playmaker and I do not believe that difference would be larger than the difference defensively. So I still take Bridges.

Do those descriptions sound like the players you are talking about? Or am I missing a player that you are thinking of?

[tazzmaniac]

With the 12th pick of the 5th round, the Memphis Grizzlies select  Mikal Bridges.

Good fit with his shooting and defence alongside your plethora of offensive stars

This is something I've talked about with a couple of guys regarding the draft, and then also in the discussion about the IRL Nets.

Does adding a defensive stud make sense if your entire team is built around offense?  How much can one guy do on defense?  Would assets be better spent to maximizing the offense?  Adding facilitators and ultra-efficient finishers?

I think it depends. If it's a transformative defender at the 5 like Gobert, or Ben Wallace, I think it makes a big difference. That becomes less important on the perimeter, naturally, but I still like the idea of balance. Plus, Bridges is pretty handy with his efficiency

I added an edit above that clarified that elite defensive centers are individual difference makers.  I agree with you there.

Bridges is very efficient, but he's not much of a volume guy, and he doesn't add a ton rebounding or passing, either.

Jvalin and I had a similar conversation via PMs.  I'm just not sure if he adds a ton.  If you accept that an individual perimeter player surrounded by four sub-par defenders won't make much of a difference on a team's defense, then does it make sense to add a low volume shooter?  I don't think so.

You're making Bridges sound offensively incompetent - he's a hyper-efficient scorer and killer shooter. Sure, he's not the best creator in the world but he's not going to hold you back.

He won't hold you back, but he'll add less than probably two dozen players offensively, at least.  If his defense is marginalized, then is there a good reason to not go for the best offensive player available?

To over-simplify, at this point the die has been cast.  Some teams are offense-only, some are defense-oriented, and some go both ways.  This deep into the draft, I think that teams should play to their strengths.

I would look at it a bit differently with Mikal Bridges' offense. I would look at it in terms of efficiency rather than total scoring and total assists. Does he elevate my team's offensive efficiency as a fifth wheel and low volume offensive player more than a higher volume lower efficiency offensive player does?

That would be how I would look at his offense.

I would worry about how much a 5th option can add when he is standing in a queue behind Lillard, Towns, SGA and Randle. How many touches will that 5th option really get? How many shots?

A low volume high efficiency guy could add more to that lineup's offense than a higher volume but lower efficiency guy can.

In that light, I look at Mikal Bridges as a great fit offensively.

This is potentially true.  But, I'm not arguing for higher volume, lower efficiency.  I'm arguing for higher volume, roughly equal efficiency.

I've already got all the volume I need with Lillard, Towns, Randle and Shai.  They will create plenty of 3pt opportunities for Bridges.  Then add in his very good defense.  In any case, I don't think there is a higher volume, roughly equal efficiency small forward available. 

[Roy H.]

With the 12th pick of the 5th round, the Memphis Grizzlies select  Mikal Bridges.

Good fit with his shooting and defence alongside your plethora of offensive stars

This is something I've talked about with a couple of guys regarding the draft, and then also in the discussion about the IRL Nets.

Does adding a defensive stud make sense if your entire team is built around offense?  How much can one guy do on defense?  Would assets be better spent to maximizing the offense?  Adding facilitators and ultra-efficient finishers?

I think it depends. If it's a transformative defender at the 5 like Gobert, or Ben Wallace, I think it makes a big difference. That becomes less important on the perimeter, naturally, but I still like the idea of balance. Plus, Bridges is pretty handy with his efficiency

I added an edit above that clarified that elite defensive centers are individual difference makers.  I agree with you there.

Bridges is very efficient, but he's not much of a volume guy, and he doesn't add a ton rebounding or passing, either.

Jvalin and I had a similar conversation via PMs.  I'm just not sure if he adds a ton.  If you accept that an individual perimeter player surrounded by four sub-par defenders won't make much of a difference on a team's defense, then does it make sense to add a low volume shooter?  I don't think so.

You're making Bridges sound offensively incompetent - he's a hyper-efficient scorer and killer shooter. Sure, he's not the best creator in the world but he's not going to hold you back.

He won't hold you back, but he'll add less than probably two dozen players offensively, at least.  If his defense is marginalized, then is there a good reason to not go for the best offensive player available?

To over-simplify, at this point the die has been cast.  Some teams are offense-only, some are defense-oriented, and some go both ways.  This deep into the draft, I think that teams should play to their strengths.

I would look at it a bit differently with Mikal Bridges' offense. I would look at it in terms of efficiency rather than total scoring and total assists. Does he elevate my team's offensive efficiency as a fifth wheel and low volume offensive player more than a higher volume lower efficiency offensive player does?

That would be how I would look at his offense.

I would worry about how much a 5th option can add when he is standing in a queue behind Lillard, Towns, SGA and Randle. How many touches will that 5th option really get? How many shots?

A low volume high efficiency guy could add more to that lineup's offense than a higher volume but lower efficiency guy can.

In that light, I look at Mikal Bridges as a great fit offensively.

This is potentially true.  But, I'm not arguing for higher volume, lower efficiency.  I'm arguing for higher volume, roughly equal efficiency.

I've already got all the volume I need with Lillard, Towns, Randle and Shai.  They will create plenty of 3pt opportunities for Bridges.  Then add in his very good defense.  In any case, I don't think there is a higher volume, roughly equal efficiency small forward available.

I think there are.  I'll let you know when my favorite of them gets drafted.

I suspect Who and I are probably thinking of the same players.

[nickagneta]

I was scanning through the BRef profiles of my players to get some info to discuss how good the Spurs offense will be, when I saw Valanciunas was only 29 years old!!!

It seems like forever ago that Jonas came into the league and everyone labeled him a soft Euro player. Those comments seem kinda ridiculous in retrospect. But I digress.

Just 29 years old! I was shocked. I thought for sure he was 3-4 years older than that.

[Who]

It's a terrific question. I suppose I was asking myself the same thing with the Michael Porter Jr pick.

I felt he could elevate my team's offense in a major way as a super-skilled PF. And I was comparing him to other forwards who were better defensive players or better two-way players (Harrison Barnes) but I did not feel they added more to my team than MPJ did because MPJ could improve my team's offense so much.

[Who]

I was watching this youtube video of the Suns success this season and what we can learn from it. They were talking about the team's passing ability and it's extraordinary AST:TO ratio (record breaking? I forget).

CP3 is obviously the key driver of this success. Then Devin Booker and to a lesser extent their backup PG. But they were also quick to point out a few other features:

The connective tissue passing offered by a couple of players:

(1) The two backup centers who were high post facilitators. One a former PF turned small ball C. Actually I guess both are since the other was playing in the wrong position for the first several years of his career.
(2) A bench SF who gave good extra passing and ball handling
(3) Mikal Bridges and the other starting PF who rarely turned the ball over and Bridges had an abnormally high AST:TO ratio for players of his ilk.

The Suns player's chimed in saying it was because all 5 guys on the court could pass the ball and make decisions. Ayton is a bit of a question mark at a slightly negative AST:TO although is clearly potential there moving forward. He does do some good things. But Ayton was the only question mark. Everyone else was good at those type of connective tissue passing that gave extra ball-movement searching for the best possible shot off of the key playmaking of CP3, Booker and the bench PG.

I thought it was a really good video.

I saw another video about Bridges specifically and that was where I saw the figures for his transition offense, off ball cuts (instead of just standing in the corner, he backdoors more frequently than most other 3+D guys) and his offensive rebounding. Along with a video clip of him saying he does not like being called a 3+D guy because he feels he does more than that and I thought the video did a nice job of showing some of that.

It gave me a great appreciation of the guy and what he brings to a team's offense. I like role players that can contribute in a few different ways as well as the spot up shooting. It is something that I have long felt is under-valued about Danny Green's offense.

[theswitch]

I was watching this youtube video of the Suns success this season and what we can learn from it. They were talking about the team's passing ability and it's extraordinary AST:TO ratio (record breaking? I forget).

CP3 is obviously the key driver of this success. Then Devin Booker and to a lesser extent their backup PG. But they were also quick to point out a few other features:

The connective tissue passing offered by a couple of players:

(1) The two backup centers who were high post facilitators. One a former PF turned small ball C. Actually I guess both are since the other was playing in the wrong position for the first several years of his career.
(2) A bench SF who gave good extra passing and ball handling
(3) Mikal Bridges and the other starting PF who rarely turned the ball over and Bridges had an abnormally high AST:TO ratio for players of his ilk.

The Suns player's chimed in saying it was because all 5 guys on the court could pass the ball and make decisions. Ayton is a bit of a question mark at a slightly negative AST:TO although is clearly potential there moving forward. He does do some good things. But Ayton was the only question mark. Everyone else was good at those type of connective tissue passing that gave extra ball-movement searching for the best possible shot off of the key playmaking of CP3, Booker and the bench PG.

I thought it was a really good video.

I saw another video about Bridges' specifically and that was where I saw the figures for his transition offense, off ball cuts (instead of just standing in the corner, he backdoors more frequently than most other 3+D guys) and his offensive rebounding. Along with a video clip of him saying he does not like being called a 3+D guy because he feels he does more than that and I thought the video did a nice job of showing some of that.

It gave me a great appreciation of the guy and what he brings to a team's offense. I like role players that can contribute in a few different ways as well as the spot up shooting. It is something that I have long felt is under-valued about Danny Green's offense.

I'm not all the way there yet, but for what it's worth I'll plug that Curry, Brogdon, Simmons, Bam are all excellent passers that mirror a lot of that. Grant isn't a great facilitator but like the other PF he's a one turnover a game guy. Even last year with all the increased usage on a bad team, he was only up to 2.0. Passing makes for beautiful basketball.

For what it's worth, Lillard - SGA - Randle - Towns has that in spades too for Bridges.

[Who]

I was watching this youtube video of the Suns success this season and what we can learn from it. They were talking about the team's passing ability and it's extraordinary AST:TO ratio (record breaking? I forget).

CP3 is obviously the key driver of this success. Then Devin Booker and to a lesser extent their backup PG. But they were also quick to point out a few other features:

The connective tissue passing offered by a couple of players:

(1) The two backup centers who were high post facilitators. One a former PF turned small ball C. Actually I guess both are since the other was playing in the wrong position for the first several years of his career.
(2) A bench SF who gave good extra passing and ball handling
(3) Mikal Bridges and the other starting PF who rarely turned the ball over and Bridges had an abnormally high AST:TO ratio for players of his ilk.

The Suns player's chimed in saying it was because all 5 guys on the court could pass the ball and make decisions. Ayton is a bit of a question mark at a slightly negative AST:TO although is clearly potential there moving forward. He does do some good things. But Ayton was the only question mark. Everyone else was good at those type of connective tissue passing that gave extra ball-movement searching for the best possible shot off of the key playmaking of CP3, Booker and the bench PG.

I thought it was a really good video.

I saw another video about Bridges' specifically and that was where I saw the figures for his transition offense, off ball cuts (instead of just standing in the corner, he backdoors more frequently than most other 3+D guys) and his offensive rebounding. Along with a video clip of him saying he does not like being called a 3+D guy because he feels he does more than that and I thought the video did a nice job of showing some of that.

It gave me a great appreciation of the guy and what he brings to a team's offense. I like role players that can contribute in a few different ways as well as the spot up shooting. It is something that I have long felt is under-valued about Danny Green's offense.

I'm not all the way there yet, but for what it's worth I'll plug that Curry, Brogdon, Simmons, Bam are all excellent passers that mirror a lot of that. Grant isn't a great facilitator but like the other PF he's a one turnover a game guy. Even last year with all the increased usage on a bad team, he was only up to 2.0. Passing makes for beautiful basketball.

For what it's worth, Lillard - SGA - Randle - Towns has that in spades too for Bridges.

It was one of the things I loved about your Brogdon pick. Having that big combo guard who can handle the ball well and pass well alongside Steph Curry. That is an excellent fit with Steph's off ball running.

[tazzmaniac]

It's a terrific question. I suppose I was asking myself the same thing with the Michael Porter Jr pick.

I felt he could elevate my team's offense in a major way as a super-skilled PF. And I was comparing him to other forwards who were better defensive players or better two-way players (Harrison Barnes) but I did not feel they added more to my team than MPJ did because MPJ could improve my team's offense so much.

I was hoping to get Porter or Anunoby this round as a 3/4 and then Bridges at the beginning of the next round as a 3/2.  Figuring that Bridges would be more under the radar. 

Does MPJ really give you any more offensively than Bridges would have?  MPJ is higher volume on Denver than Bridges is on the Suns but on your team aren't they basically going to get the same offensive opportunities?   

[tazzmaniac]

I was scanning through the BRef profiles of my players to get some info to discuss how good the Spurs offense will be, when I saw Valanciunas was only 29 years old!!!

It seems like forever ago that Jonas came into the league and everyone labeled him a soft Euro player. Those comments seem kinda ridiculous in retrospect. But I digress.

Just 29 years old! I was shocked. I thought for sure he was 3-4 years older than that.

The one that gets me is another young double-double machine.  He just turned 28 but it seems like he's been in the league forever.  He's also oddly down to making vet minimum for the Sixers. 

[tazzmaniac]

I was watching this youtube video of the Suns success this season and what we can learn from it. They were talking about the team's passing ability and it's extraordinary AST:TO ratio (record breaking? I forget).

CP3 is obviously the key driver of this success. Then Devin Booker and to a lesser extent their backup PG. But they were also quick to point out a few other features:

The connective tissue passing offered by a couple of players:

(1) The two backup centers who were high post facilitators. One a former PF turned small ball C. Actually I guess both are since the other was playing in the wrong position for the first several years of his career.
(2) A bench SF who gave good extra passing and ball handling
(3) Mikal Bridges and the other starting PF who rarely turned the ball over and Bridges had an abnormally high AST:TO ratio for players of his ilk.

The Suns player's chimed in saying it was because all 5 guys on the court could pass the ball and make decisions. Ayton is a bit of a question mark at a slightly negative AST:TO although is clearly potential there moving forward. He does do some good things. But Ayton was the only question mark. Everyone else was good at those type of connective tissue passing that gave extra ball-movement searching for the best possible shot off of the key playmaking of CP3, Booker and the bench PG.

I thought it was a really good video.

I saw another video about Bridges' specifically and that was where I saw the figures for his transition offense, off ball cuts (instead of just standing in the corner, he backdoors more frequently than most other 3+D guys) and his offensive rebounding. Along with a video clip of him saying he does not like being called a 3+D guy because he feels he does more than that and I thought the video did a nice job of showing some of that.

It gave me a great appreciation of the guy and what he brings to a team's offense. I like role players that can contribute in a few different ways as well as the spot up shooting. It is something that I have long felt is under-valued about Danny Green's offense.

I'm not all the way there yet, but for what it's worth I'll plug that Curry, Brogdon, Simmons, Bam are all excellent passers that mirror a lot of that. Grant isn't a great facilitator but like the other PF he's a one turnover a game guy. Even last year with all the increased usage on a bad team, he was only up to 2.0. Passing makes for beautiful basketball.

For what it's worth, Lillard - SGA - Randle - Towns has that in spades too for Bridges.

It was one of the things I loved about your Brogdon pick. Having that big combo guard who can handle the ball well and pass well alongside Steph Curry. That is an excellent fit with Steph's off ball running.

I liked the Brogdon pick too.  I was actually thinking he may have been a better pick for you than McCollum.   

[theswitch]

I was scanning through the BRef profiles of my players to get some info to discuss how good the Spurs offense will be, when I saw Valanciunas was only 29 years old!!!

It seems like forever ago that Jonas came into the league and everyone labeled him a soft Euro player. Those comments seem kinda ridiculous in retrospect. But I digress.

Just 29 years old! I was shocked. I thought for sure he was 3-4 years older than that.

The one that gets me is .  He just turned 28 but it seems like he's been in the league forever.  He's also oddly down to making vet minimum for the Sixers.

Names

[nickagneta]

After drafting Lebron and JB, my PG list went like:

1. Jrue Holiday
2. Mike Conley
3. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
4. Malcolm Brogdan
5. Kyle Lowry

I'm not saying they were the 5 best at the time of my pick. Fit was a huge factor given the Lebron offensive engine and those were the guys that would fit how I wanted the team to play.

Brogdan might be, IRL, the quintessential PG for a Lebron James team. I am real high on him. Heck, if IRL Indy decided to blow it up, Brad better be ready to dump picks on the Pacers to get Brogdan.

[Roy H.]

Does MPJ really give you any more offensively than Bridges would have?  MPJ is higher volume on Denver than Bridges is on the Suns but on your team aren't they basically going to get the same offensive opportunities?   

He does, because he's a better offensive player.  Let's assume for argument that they're both 4th or 5th options.  The better offensive player is still more useful.  He's proven that he can score at a higher volume, and in some games that's a talent that will need to be relied upon.

Sometimes, primary options have tough nights.  Look at the IRL Bucks:  they had multiple nights where one or both of Jrue and Middleton were off.  If they had to go to a fourth option, would you want the guy who have proven he can give you 20ppg, or 13ppg?  The 6'10" guy who scored 20+ in half of his games (6 30+ games), or the 6'6" guy who scored in single digits twice as often as he put up 20?