We still pretending the Warriors didn't make a mistake drafting Wiseman over Lamelo or nah

[Braman]

A gamble that doesn't pay off doesn't make it a bad move at the time. Hindsight is 20/20.

It's like saying that whoever put money on the Bucks beating Miami these playoffs were idiots. The smart money was on Milwaukee winning, but shyt happens.

A “gamble” at #2 is absolutely a bad move

And this ain’t hindsight brother. Lamelo was ahead of wiseman on most boards. Ahead of Edwards in a few:

2020 NBA Draft Big Board: Ultimate list of top 76 prospects

We look at how the 2020 draft prospects line up on the aggregate.

theathletic.com

https://www.si.com/nba/2020/11/09/nba-draft-big-board-top-80-rankings

2020 NBA Draft Prospect Rankings: Final big board of CBS Sports top 100 pro prospects

www.cbssports.com

Tiered board for high-variance 2020 NBA Draft

The 2020 NBA Draft is not as bad as many consider it.

nba.nbcsports.com

 

[42 Monks]

i don't understand how so many of yal *know* you don't know what you're talking about, but go crazy arguing shyt all the same

monk was a legit dope fiend in charlotte of all cities and yal writing up paragraphs of fan fiction.

there was literally no other team capable of giving him as many chances as the hornets did. and even on top of that mitch's experience with similar fukkery/the old guard basketball operations folks dealing with ben gordon is what even gave him the chance and structure to bounce back in the first place.

 

[Braman]

Poole may be good. But he's not good for this team in the short term or long term. He wants a larger role, but he's not going to jump steph and klay. He's not good enough for it

I think he falls into the same archetype as lou will and jamal crawford: score, and then when the playoffs come, struggle to score. Jamal and Lou must have been in multiple poor situations because they flamed out everywhere the same exact way.

Now that we can agree

As to the 2nd part yea I generally agree IF Poole stays as a 2. However the reason I’m so high on him is I think he can play as a modern 1. He’d go from being undersized as a 2 to being big for a 1.

There’s plenty of guys who play score first, ‘bag’ type players just like him,no defense, who play the 1. Jamal Murray, CJ Mccolum, D Lo—-who people have always ridiculed as recent as 2 weeks ago, yet now he’s close to being the #3 on a title squad —-dearon Fox ridiculed for years how’d that turn out

So yea, I don’t follow mob mentality Poole can hoop

 

[tremonthustler1]

Bad take.

1- Who cares what Poole and Moody would be doing. Melo is the superior player.

2- You don’t draft for need at #2 overall.

And that’s the warriors problem. They’re still accommodating to the old model and old players. The minute I saw Draymond pulling wiseman aside and coaching him I said aww nah that’s not gon work. It’s like if you start a job and you got high goals and they got the 10 year career worker who’s never been promoted mentoring you. Like bruh I don’t wanna be you They got the #2 pick trying to make him the new Draymond. He’s overqualified for that.

Poole never happens at all, so unless you think Poole was insignificant to their run last year, that's the difference between a ring and not having one.

As for #2, of course you can draft BPA, but that requires some real tough ass decisions, decisions they didn't wanna make.

The fact that some of yall think Poole is even comparable to Lamelo says a lot.

The Warriors draft Lamelo and they not only win last year, but they're probably the 1 seed this year. He's a legit superstar.

Here's the problem:


If you were to pay LaMelo max money to come off your bench, it's a horrible allocation of your resources, just like Poole is. If you give someone that kind of money, he better be replacing whoever your starter is. At best, Klay's gotta go. At worst, Golden State has to have the hardest discussion of their lives regarding LaMelo vs. Steph and not even LaMelo's biggest dikkrider can make the case to dump Steph.

 

[tremonthustler1]

i don't understand how so many of yal *know* you don't know what you're talking about, but go crazy arguing shyt all the same

monk was a legit dope fiend in charlotte of all cities and yal writing up paragraphs of fan fiction.

there was literally no other team capable of giving him as many chances as the hornets did. and even on top of that mitch's experience with similar fukkery/the old guard basketball operations folks dealing with ben gordon is what even gave him the chance and structure to bounce back in the first place.

Look, I remember when everyone LOVED Monk out of Kentucky and then everyone pretended he no longer existed only now it's safe for everyone to like him again.


Kris Dunn is about to get the same treatment over the next year or so, God willing.

 

[Braman]

i don't understand how so many of yal *know* you don't know what you're talking about, but go crazy arguing shyt all the same

monk was a legit dope fiend in charlotte of all cities and yal writing up paragraphs of fan fiction.

there was literally no other team capable of giving him as many chances as the hornets did. and even on top of that mitch's experience with similar fukkery/the old guard basketball operations folks dealing with ben gordon is what even gave him the chance and structure to bounce back in the first place.

Wait this was true

But yea ‘Monk was always good’ is wild. Dudes get revisionist ASAP when guys become good.

If last year in LA didn’t go well he was inching out the league

 

[Braman]

Poole never happens at all, so unless you think Poole was insignificant to their run last year, that's the difference between a ring and not having one.

As for #2, of course you can draft BPA, but that requires some real tough ass decisions, decisions they didn't wanna make.

Here's the problem:


If you were to pay LaMelo max money to come off your bench, it's a horrible allocation of your resources, just like Poole is. If you give someone that kind of money, he better be replacing whoever your starter is. At best, Klay's gotta go. At worst, Golden State has to have the hardest discussion of their lives regarding LaMelo vs. Steph and not even LaMelo's biggest dikkrider can make the case to dump Steph.

Fam what the hell you talkin bout

- Lamelo would be due to get paid this off-season, not last

- So in a hypothetical scenario, he’d be coming off the bench for 2 years then likely a starter by now (more on that below). He’d be a key contributor just like Poole but better —-just different

- So to answer your question, yea, I still think GS wins last year with lamelo off the bench bc…he’s better than Jordan Poole. Again, it would just look different. Points would be allocated differently, etc. But Lamelo’s net impact >>>>> Poole’s

- You should be banned for ‘choose Steph or Lamelo’. As if Steph isn’t the most off ball capable guard of all time. Your decision would be to play small (Lamelo-Steph-Klay-Wigs), or to bring Wigs off the bench, or to trade wigs. I’d do the last 2 in a heartbeat. Thanks Wiggy but Lamelo is that good and klay is still a good enough wing defender

-And then this off-season yea I’m paying Lamelo just like they paid Poole. Draymond thanks for your service

 

[LV Koopa]

Poole never happens at all, so unless you think Poole was insignificant to their run last year, that's the difference between a ring and not having one.

As for #2, of course you can draft BPA, but that requires some real tough ass decisions, decisions they didn't wanna make.

Here's the problem:


If you were to pay LaMelo max money to come off your bench, it's a horrible allocation of your resources, just like Poole is. If you give someone that kind of money, he better be replacing whoever your starter is. At best, Klay's gotta go. At worst, Golden State has to have the hardest discussion of their lives regarding LaMelo vs. Steph and not even LaMelo's biggest dikkrider can make the case to dump Steph.

??? You serious breh?

It would never be a Lamelo vs Steph situation. It wouldn't even be a Lamelo vs Klay. They already are in the tax paying Poole and others. They likely not only do not get drafted if Lamelo is there, but if they do it is THEM vs Lamelo if money becomes a concern. The Warriors will know Lamelo is a star, seeing as they'd have drafted him in the LOTTERY and be prepared to pay him if he blows up. This is not the situation you're painting it as.

 

[tremonthustler1]

Fam what the hell you talkin bout

- Lamelo would be due to get paid this off-season, not last

- So in a hypothetical scenario, 2 years isnt THAT long. to come off the bench. That’s about thtbmax tho. He’s show a ton of dishes and be a key contributor just like people but better —-just different

- So to answer your question, yea, I still think GS wins last year with lamelo off the bench bc…he’s better than Jordan Poole. Again, it would just look different. Points would be allocated differently, etc. But Lamelo’s net impact >>>>> Poole’s

- You should be banned for ‘choose Steph or Lamelo’. As if Stepgh isn’t the most off ball capable guard of all time. Your decision would be to play small (Lamelo-Steph-Klay-Wigs), or to bring Wigs off the bench, or to trade wigs. I’d do the last 2 in a heartbeat. Thanks Wiggy but Lamelo is that good and klay is still a good enough wing defender

-And then this off-season yea I’m paying Lamelo just like they pod Poole. Draymond thanks for your service

That doesn't change my point. If we wanna be technical about it, Poole's extension hasn't kicked in yet.

We don't even know if LaMelo is built for the playoffs. All we know is that he's played in 2 important games in his life and he shyt the bed in both (his play-ins).


as for the second bolded, again, doesn't change my point. One of the Splash Brothers has to go once LaMelo cashes in because it isn't sustainable. The Splash Brothers will be no more in San Francisco when the Splash Brothers decide that. Nobody else. Consider this: they gave $130 mil to Poole and still haven't decided that going small full-time was the way to go.

 

[Left.A1]

Poole never happens at all, so unless you think Poole was insignificant to their run last year, that's the difference between a ring and not having one.

As for #2, of course you can draft BPA, but that requires some real tough ass decisions, decisions they didn't wanna make.

Here's the problem:


If you were to pay LaMelo max money to come off your bench, it's a horrible allocation of your resources, just like Poole is. If you give someone that kind of money, he better be replacing whoever your starter is. At best, Klay's gotta go. At worst, Golden State has to have the hardest discussion of their lives regarding LaMelo vs. Steph and not even LaMelo's biggest dikkrider can make the case to dump Steph.

This is the same weak argument dudes presented during the draft and I’ll say to you what I said then …having too many good players is NEVER a bad thing and Lamelo is not a ball hog …when you start working from the frame of mind that you’re afraid of having too many talented players you start making mistakes…Divincinzo somehow is finding a way to play 26 mpg on this team as another guard but you guys are still trying to sell this stuff about Ball getting in the way of players growth ..I think it’s nonsense ..if worse comes to worse in that situation guess what ..you actually have a valuable trade asset to go out and then balance your team down the road instead of a worthless one like Wiseman was… look at what Sacramento did with Halliburton and flipping him into Sabonis once they realized he and fox wouldn’t work together ..there’s no excuse for drafting Wiseman in tht spot …from a talent evaluation perspective and an asset management perspective it was a stupid process of decision making

 

[Braman]

That doesn't change my point. If we wanna be technical about it, Poole's extension hasn't kicked in yet.

We don't even know if LaMelo is built for the playoffs. All we know is that he's played in 2 important games in his life and he shyt the bed in both (his play-ins).


as for the second bolded, again, doesn't change my point. One of the Splash Brothers has to go once LaMelo cashes in because it isn't sustainable. The Splash Brothers will be no more in San Francisco when the Splash Brothers decide that. Nobody else. Consider this: they gave $130 mil to Poole and still haven't decided that going small full-time was the way to go.

So you’re saying they’ll pay Poole while keeping the splash brothers together, but they wouldn’t pay Lamelo and keep the splash brothers together

But again to your technical point, a Lamelo max deal this off-season wouldn’t kick in for another year—-when klay’s deal comes off the books

So this is all a moot point. There is no scenario in which they’d be paying Melo and Klay the max simultaneously. Bc after next year a 34 year old Klay will either sign a team friendly deal or take the highest bidder for a shyt team—-that would have happened in the hypothetical lamelo situation and will happen in real life anyway

 

[tremonthustler1]

??? You serious breh?

It would never be a Lamelo vs Steph situation. It wouldn't even be a Lamelo vs Klay. They already are in the tax paying Poole and others. They likely not only do not get drafted if Lamelo is there, but if they do it is THEM vs Lamelo if money becomes a concern. The Warriors will know Lamelo is a star, seeing as they'd have drafted him in the LOTTERY and be prepared to pay him if he blows up. This is not the situation you're painting it as.

Poole's deal hasn't even started yet.

 

[tremonthustler1]

So you’re saying they’ll pay Poole while keeping the splash brothers together, but they wouldn’t pay Lamelo and keep the splash brothers together

But again to your technical point, a Lamelo max deal this off-season wouldn’t kick in for another year—-when klay’s deal comes off the books

So this is all a moot point. There is no scenario in which they’d be paying Melo and Klay the max simultaneously. Bc after next year a 34 year old Klay will either sign a team friendly deal or take the highest bidder for a shyt team—-that would have happened in the hypothetical lamelo situation and will happen in real life anyway

I'm saying paying Poole will be a bad decision because of the role he's in regardless of how good he is. Those guys become starters. Like I've already said, Poole's extension hasn't kicked in yet.


I'mma ask you this: I could be wrong, but Klay ain't retiring in 2 years. You really think they're gonna kick him to the curb in 2 years?

 

[LV Koopa]

Poole's deal hasn't even started yet.

The point is the Warriors are paying the luxury tax now. Before Poole's extension has kicked in. Lamelo is 1000 times better than Poole - they would not hesitate to pay him.

 

[Killer Instinct]

Why are we pretending like Steph can't play the 2 guard as well as he plays the 1? Curry would have been absolutely fine at the SG role so long as Klay or Wiggins were on the floor. Lamelo's defense isn't anything to write home about but he also has length Steph lacks. They're already small so who gives a damn? He's has never played with anyone with Lamelo's court vision & passing. They would gave meshed perfectly, and God willing, Steph could have worked with the kid on his jumper. The Warriors would have a much better outlook going forward if he's picked over Wiseman, and I'd much sooner trust Lamelo in 3 - 5 years when begins to decline and likely moves off ball entirely than I would Jordan Poole.

You have a guy ready to step in that's soaked up game from a first ballot HoFer & that would honestly be prepared to be your franchise PG as the old guard hands over the reigns. The Wiseman pick was a mistake. He's rotting in Detroit and will likely be out of the league in another year or two. It's okay to admit Golden State got cute and made an easy decision into an unnecessarily contrived one.