2024 Blazers draft - Should we select BPA or fit?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Should the Blazers draft BPA or fit?


  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .

SharpesTriumph

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 4, 2018
Messages
12,754
Likes
11,475
Points
113
Should the Blazers draft the best player available (BPA) or draft based on fit?

If we still have Scoot, Simons, Brogdon on the roster this summer along with Sharpe at SG I can't imagine using our top pick for another short PG.
 
I’ve posted about this before, but size MUST BE part of the “BPA” criteria.

It is simply far too easy to find short, score first guards that often play little to no defense.

You’ve got to be leagues ahead of your peers if you’re a short guard IMO.
 
With our first pick, I want a forward. I consider Sarr a PF and think there might be a drop-off after the top 3, (Sarr, Risacher, Williams) but I would probably roll the dice with Holland or Buzelis if the top 3 are off the board.

With GS's pick, I would prefer we take the BPA.
 
I’ve posted about this before, but size MUST BE part of the “BPA” criteria.

It is simply far too easy to find short, score first guards that often play little to no defense.

You’ve got to be leagues ahead of your peers if you’re a short guard IMO.

I am nitpicking here, but I would say that defense must be part of the BPA., not necessarily size. Granted it doesn't happen very often but sometimes short guards can play defense. Chris Paul made a few Blazer fans look like complete idiots when they didn't want to draft him because of his size. Again it doesn't happen often but let's not make that mistake again.
 
This "rebuild" looks like a repeat of the Dame/CJ one. Blazers will max contract Shaedon and Scoot, leaving us no cap room for a big-time FA. We can not win like this. DRAFT BIGS. GAMBLE. 1st round, 2nd round. FIND A BIG!
 
BPA always. We have no idea how Shae and/or Scoot will pan out. Take the best according to scouting reports.
 
Should the Blazers draft the best player available (BPA) or draft based on fit?

If we still have Scoot, Simons, Brogdon on the roster this summer along with Sharpe at SG I can't imagine using our top pick for another short PG.
Id go with positional need. Front court
 
This draft is such a crapshoot that I don't think there are many consensus BPA guys.

I think that is probably true. This makes it an easy choice IMO to grab a forward with the first pick. The only guard in the top 5 is Topic and he is 6'6 201 lbs.
 
Wouldn’t worry to much about it……weakest draft in years. This pick/picks won’t help us for years regardless.
 
When the “experts” can’t even come up with the same “BPA” for even the Top 3 picks….. you know it’s a mess.

So basically just like 2 years go. I mean we know there is no superstar in this draft, but that doesn't mean it is a mess.
 
we're getting Cody Williams, 2 guards, and 1 PF/C. The Remix is going to be loaded next season!

from the clips I've seen, Cody has the length to get buckets, good outside touch, open court handles. If Lamar Odom put down the crack pipe, and had a baby with Darius Miles, he would be a Blazer this summer.
 
If we’re sitting at 2 or 3 I’m taking BPA…

Nikola Topic

You can even make the case for taking him #1

Intangibles/feel — he’s the best player in the draft

 
We need a big man, like a Greg Oden or a Sam Bowie.

barfo
 
It's starting to look like the consensus prospect ratings on the top handful of guys are pretty damn close. If we were sitting at three last season and let's just say had an all nba PG and the guy who was the clear cut number 3 or we even had him number 2 then I'd expect us to trade back and/or out of the draft.

That's the thing there are far more options than just BPA or positional need sacrificing value. You can trade back adding more draft assets and getting a guy who you like as a fit. You can trade out of the draft and either pick up a proven player who fits a need or future draft capital. You can do a lot of things and you just do what makes sense for your roster and the goals you have for it. Obviously if it's Wemby and you have two good young players or even two proven superstars in the post you take Wemby and make it work. There's no Wemby in this draft so there are no hard and fast answers.
 
It's starting to look like the consensus prospect ratings on the top handful of guys are pretty damn close. If we were sitting at three last season and let's just say had an all nba PG and the guy who was the clear cut number 3 or we even had him number 2 then I'd expect us to trade back and/or out of the draft.

That's the thing there are far more options than just BPA or positional need sacrificing value. You can trade back adding more draft assets and getting a guy who you like as a fit. You can trade out of the draft and either pick up a proven player who fits a need or future draft capital. You can do a lot of things and you just do what makes sense for your roster and the goals you have for it. Obviously if it's Wemby and you have two good young players or even two proven superstars in the post you take Wemby and make it work. There's no Wemby in this draft so there are no hard and fast answers.
yeah, I could see packaging the pick with a player to obtain a young proven front court player or wing.
 
This draft is such a crapshoot that I don't think there are many consensus BPA guys.
Yeah there are serious, serious question marks about all of these guys. (Here are some bits and pieces from different places)

sarr is a minus rebounder and hasn’t proven he can shoot, yet. So if the defense doesn’t immediately pop in the NBL- NBA transition what is he?

topic is said to be one of the worst defensive prospects in recent memory.

Cody is a limited shot creator, and more of a finesse finisher vs physical one and doesn’t like to attack ATR going into the body of the defender. He hasn’t produced very consistently or dominated much for Colorado either. It’s a lot of eye test stuff.

Risacher is more of an off-ball performer, and will disappear for large stretches of the game if you don’t involve him in the game. If you draft him he may not be a star. Until very recently was not comfortable attacking the rim with vigor—it was a lot of off-the-catch stuff.

Matas has shot better recently but started the year pretty poor from the outside. The GLI-ness of his draft stock makes him tough to project—they are absolutely awful, and for many games he was stuck in the corner.

##

In a draft with zero no-brainer picks I am not going all-in on any of these guys—whoever they pick there will need to be a degree of faith by the fan base. So I’m not sure there’s a very strong ‘BPA’ ranking here, they’re all in a similar tier where fit will be very important.
 
yeah, I could see packaging the pick with a player to obtain a young proven front court player or wing.

Ant and the pick for who?

The conflict i see is who is trading a young proven player for an unproven pick and a solid player with flaws like Ant?

young proven players are super valuable. It would likely require multiple picks and Ant, at minimum.
 
Risacher is more of an off-ball performer, and will disappear for large stretches of the game if you don’t involve him in the game. If you draft him he may not be a star. Until very recently was not comfortable attacking the rim with vigor—it was a lot of off-the-catch stuff.
On a team built based on Scoot and Sharpe, that sounds absolutely perfect.
 
On a team built based on Scoot and Sharpe, that sounds absolutely perfect.
I like Risacher--I think some are looking for more of an all-around, star archetype that high in the lottery. I don't think Risacher is necessarily Him/Himothy/Himbucktu.
 
Yeah there are serious, serious question marks about all of these guys. (Here are some bits and pieces from different places)

sarr is a minus rebounder and hasn’t proven he can shoot, yet. So if the defense doesn’t immediately pop in the NBL- NBA transition what is he?

topic is said to be one of the worst defensive prospects in recent memory.

Cody is a limited shot creator, and more of a finesse finisher vs physical one and doesn’t like to attack ATR going into the body of the defender. He hasn’t produced very consistently or dominated much for Colorado either. It’s a lot of eye test stuff.

Risacher is more of an off-ball performer, and will disappear for large stretches of the game if you don’t involve him in the game. If you draft him he may not be a star. Until very recently was not comfortable attacking the rim with vigor—it was a lot of off-the-catch stuff.

Matas has shot better recently but started the year pretty poor from the outside. The GLI-ness of his draft stock makes him tough to project—they are absolutely awful, and for many games he was stuck in the corner.

##

In a draft with zero no-brainer picks, I am not going all-in on any of these guys—whoever they pick there will need to be a degree of faith by the fan base. So I’m not sure there’s a very strong ‘BPA’ ranking here, they’re all in a similar tier where fit will be very important.

Yep at their age they all have flaws. But all these guys mentioned are teenagers, so this is when the team scouting personnel needs to earn their money. Projecting how they will be in two years is key. Just because there aren't any "no-brainers" does not mean the draft is weak, it just means the front offices need to be smarter in finding those who will improve the most. There will be stars from this draft, we just don't know which ones.
 
Ant and the pick for who?

The conflict i see is who is trading a young proven player for an unproven pick and a solid player with flaws like Ant?

young proven players are super valuable. It would likely require multiple picks and Ant, at minimum.

probably depends on what the current level the "proven" player is, and what the upside level is. But I tend to agree that any good young player, especially one still on his rookie contract is going to have nearly 'untouchable' value compared to Ant+pick. And I'd say that Grant would have wider value than Ant, and he still wouldn't be nearly enough leverage. I mean, Orlando wouldn't trade Franz Wagner for Ant/Grant and a 5th pick meaning the Blazers would have to aim lower or add a lot more to the offer

****************************************************************************************

I'm beginning to wonder if the "this draft class sucks" narrative is becoming like so many internet narratives and that's simply it's repeated so often it becomes a 'fact' even though it might be false

just because there is no clear cut #1 or #1-3 doesn't mean there won't be talent in the class. Portland will have a top-5 pick (probably) and there is going to be talent in the draft. The Blazers just have to identify the talent accurately and that's what Schmitz is paid to do.

right now, before changes and coin flips Portland owns the 5th - 13th (maybe down to 18th) - 34th & 40th picks. Yeah, it's a bad draft to have that collection of picks in if the goal to use them as trade leverage. But if the goal is to simply roll the dice and add talent....and Portland desperately needs more talent...then the Blazers have 4 rolls of the dice and that's a lot better than they have had lately

if you look at the last 5 drafts and see who was taken outside of the top-10:

11 Cameron Johnson
12 P.J. Washington
13 Tyler Herro
21 Brandon Clarke
29 Keldon Johnson
30 Kevin Porter Jr.
31 Nic Claxton
38 Daniel Gafford
44 Bol Bol
46 Talen Horton-Tucker

11 Devin Vassell
12 Tyrese Haliburton
14 Aaron Nesmith
15 Cole Anthony
19 Saddiq Bey
21 Tyrese Maxey
25 Immanuel Quickley
28 Jaden McDaniels
30 Desmond Bane
42 Nick Richards
49 Isaiah Joe

15 Corey Kispert
16 Alperen Şengün
17 Trey Murphy III
18 Tre Mann
26 Bones Hyland
27 Cam Thomas
35 Herbert Jones
38 Ayo Dosunmu

12 Jalen Williams
13 Jalen Duren
14 Ochai Agbaji
15 Mark Williams
22 Walker Kessler
31 Andrew Nembhard
34 Jaylin Williams
37 Jaden Hardy

that's a lot of talent taken outside of the top-10. Granted, most of it is role-player level talent, but there are some all-star level players in that mix. And with no clear-cut #1, there might be some trade movement in the top-5 of the draft. Could the Blazers leverage #5+#13 for a #2?
 
Could the Blazers leverage #5+#13 for a #2?

Not only #2 but #3 as well. I would be ok with trading the GS pick for Sarr, Risacher, or Williams. And if we are lucky enough for Topic to go in the top 3 on draft day, then #4 is as good as #3....to us.

On the other hand, if Buzelis or Holland turn out to be just as good as those other 3.......we might regret it.
The bottom line is Cronin's staff needs to guess right in June. Those workouts should be interesting.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top