Parker was always better than Wiggins.

[Fafnir]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Or Rondo's.

[kozlodoev]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Or Rondo's.

Embiid it is, then. 

[TwinTower14]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Or Rondo's.

Embiid it is, then. 

Embiid is going to be a star....

[kozlodoev]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Or Rondo's.

Embiid it is, then. 

Embiid is going to be a star....

Maybe. Or he will be Michael Olowokandi. You never know.

But with all the Wiggins/Parker/Exum craze, perhaps he can be had under the radar towards the bottom of the top 10, where we'd likely pick.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Or Rondo's.

Embiid it is, then. 

Embiid is going to be a star....

Maybe. Or he will be Michael Olowokandi. You never know.

But with all the Wiggins/Parker/Exum craze, perhaps he can be had under the radar towards the bottom of the top 10, where we'd likely pick.

I think pretty much all these players in question, in particular Wiggins and Parker are multi-positional players, as is Green, so I don't see much of a problem with that.

In that regard also, the "problem" of drafting a player of a position you already have talent in I don't really care much for, it just means that you can trade a player away for someone of interest without the consequences of making a position weaker, other than for depth purposes.

[kozlodoev]

I think pretty much all these players in question, in particular Wiggins and Parker are multi-positional players, as is Green, so I don't see much of a problem with that.

In that regard also, the "problem" of drafting a player of a position you already have talent in I don't really care much for, it just means that you can trade a player away for someone of interest without the consequences of making a position weaker, other than for depth purposes.

Yes, but they seem "multipositional" for the SF/PF position where we seem to have the most talent.

I've got no problem drafting talent, the problem is how good of a talent are you drafting. If you're replacing Green with someone of the caliber of LeBron James, that's fine. But if you're drafting someone that will ultimately be comparable to Green, it's better to draft the same talent at a position of need.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I think pretty much all these players in question, in particular Wiggins and Parker are multi-positional players, as is Green, so I don't see much of a problem with that.

In that regard also, the "problem" of drafting a player of a position you already have talent in I don't really care much for, it just means that you can trade a player away for someone of interest without the consequences of making a position weaker, other than for depth purposes.

Yes, but they seem "multipositional" for the SF/PF position where we seem to have the most talent.

I've got no problem drafting talent, the problem is how good of a talent are you drafting. If you're replacing Green with someone of the caliber of LeBron James, that's fine. But if you're drafting someone that will ultimately be comparable to Green, it's better to draft the same talent at a position of need.

I have no problem using Green & Parker/Wiggins in a SG/SF combo.

In particular Parker who also has handles.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Parker is polished for his age.

But I think Wiggins' skills while not on par with Jabari, is up there, and if it develops, would be scary especially with that athleticism.

[KGs Knee]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Somehow I don't see the presence of Jeff Green or Jared Sullinger as a deterrent from drafting any of Wiggins/Parker/Rande.

Draft the stud...trade the dud.

[KGs Knee]

Parker is polished for his age.

But I think Wiggins' skills while not on par with Jabari, is up there, and if it develops, would be scary especially with that athleticism.

This seems to be the narrative.

[Donoghus]

Parker is polished for his age.

But I think Wiggins' skills while not on par with Jabari, is up there, and if it develops, would be scary especially with that athleticism.

This seems to be the narrative.

Potential & athleticism are dangerous allures.

I just think Parker is the safest bet as an NBA player.  Barring an injury, he's going to pan out as a pro. He's already NBA ready. I still need to see more from Wiggins.

Obviously, if Wiggins is sitting there at something like #3, you have to take him and see what happens. It's a no brainer.  If you have #1, though, I'm going Parker.

Of course, that could change come March/April.

[obnoxiousmime]

[quotlet's not uthor=KGs Knee link=topic=68453.msg1583730#msg1583730 date=1386351933]

Positionally, this doesn't shape to be a very good draft for us. All of the top prospects play Jeff Green/Jared Sullinger's position.

Somehow I don't see the presence of Jeff Green or Jared Sullinger as a deterrent from drafting any of Wiggins/Parker/Rande.

Draft the stud...trade the dud.
[/quote]

Yeah let's worry about getting some talent before we're too concerned about positional redundancy. Huge draft mistakes have been made picking for position over talent. In theory the argument makes sense if two players are equal, but when has that ever happened? And what GM worth anything goes into a draft and rates two guys as equal on his board?

It's not like our team is already set with Hall of Fame-type players at multiple positions. Only in those situations do you consider possibly taking a slightly lesser talent.

[KG Living Legend]

 This is from a Chad Ford Interview I'll post it if you would like. I'm actually defending Wiggins, I think he got an unfair deal by this enormous hype. Chad Ford went onto say that "Parker was dubbed the next Lebron" I know that's stupid but you know what he means. He was the next big thing for a long time coming, he got hurt his senior year gained a lot of weight lost his quickness, and Wiggins came out of nowhere and blew people away with his body and athleticism. Now Parker is back athletically and he's here to show he's taking back what was his all along.

 This makes sense to me. Andrew doesn't have the I'm the man complex that you need to have to be that Durant, Carmelo, even Lebron in high school. Every time the hyped Lebron in every single debut I've ever seen with him He delivered. It really is amazing when guys can live up to the enormous hype they receive. Wiggins is good don't get me wrong. His upside still may be the best. But to me it was unfair that he got dubbed the number one prospect in this loaded draft. It would have been much better for him if he was rated two or three IMO.

I don't think Wiggins has ever been declared the best player.  He is often declared the best prospect.  Huge difference.

The man complex can be a nice trait to have, but Paul George never had it until this year, while Austin Rivers did have it in college.

 I do have issue with this best player best prospect argument. A lot of these draft guru's and scouts were saying Wiggins was the best player. Do you know how many times we heard he's the best prospect since Durant. Problem is Durant was a great player, prospect whatever you want to call it from day one. Same goes for Lebron and Carmelo. They were the best prospects and at the time also the best players.

[vjcsmoke]

I do have issue with this best player best prospect argument. A lot of these draft guru's and scouts were saying Wiggins was the best player. Do you know how many times we heard he's the best prospect since Durant. Problem is Durant was a great player, prospect whatever you want to call it from day one. Same goes for Lebron and Carmelo. They were the best prospects and at the time also the best players.

Ummm no.  Oden was considered the #1 prospect that year and it was nearly unanimous.  Turned out Durant was the best player of the draft but he ended up being taken #2.  Mistakes happen.  Scouts get it wrong.

[clover]

'Best player', rather concern for JG or JS should apply at this level in this draft.

But I'm intrigued by Hakeem Embiid anyway.