1997 Draft Discussion
Moderators: UOducksTK1, Zyme, lukeyrid13, Oregon Ownage
- offtheheezy
- Senior
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:09 pm
- GM: Vancouver Grizzlies
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
Gotta say, #6 was super unexpected
- pistolpetejr
- Senior
- Posts: 2965
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 2:48 pm
- GM: Los Angeles Clippers
-
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2022 6:49 pm
- dd10snoop28
- Senior
- Posts: 4821
- Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:06 am
- GM: New Jersey Nets GM
- Location: Portland, Oregon
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
no way.... maybe...maybe 5, but not 4. Billups notes r way better.JB wrote:SJax was fourth on our big board
-
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2022 6:49 pm
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
I wanted to ask what OO could have possibly meant in his SJax notes, but I didn't want to tip my hand at who I wanted as I was trying to trade up.dd10snoop28 wrote:no way.... maybe...maybe 5, but not 4. Billups notes r way better.JB wrote:SJax was fourth on our big board
But as I said earlier, I'm not really taking the notes into consideration outside of a few things I try to look for.
Kings
- offtheheezy
- Senior
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:09 pm
- GM: Vancouver Grizzlies
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
To each his own, but I honestly think you could’ve gotten SJax at 15
- UOducksTK1
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37818
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
- GM: Boston Celtics GM
- Location: Portland, Oregon
- offtheheezy
- Senior
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 10:09 pm
- GM: Vancouver Grizzlies
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
Guess I was wrong
- vincent1469
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1077
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:24 pm
- GM: Seattle Supersonics
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
I think Stak ‘s case for 6 can also be that he likely has good tendencies to be a lead scorer compared to some of the guys that are still up there.
-
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2022 6:49 pm
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
Unfortunately, our scouting department will be keeping our thought process close to the chest.vincent1469 wrote:I think Stak ‘s case for 6 can also be that he likely has good tendencies to be a lead scorer compared to some of the guys that are still up there.
Kings
- jibbajabba614
- Senior
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 6:32 pm
- GM: Milwaukee Bucks GM
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
If SJax gets the jump with defense at SG, I think it’s a solid pick.
I think next pick can be anyone in the top 15… I had SJax in top ten so not a far reach
I think next pick can be anyone in the top 15… I had SJax in top ten so not a far reach
- vincent1469
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1077
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:24 pm
- GM: Seattle Supersonics
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
Yeah with the parity of this draft there isn’t any reach that’s immensely far, its all in the eyes of the beholder.jibbajabba614 wrote:If SJax gets the jump with defense at SG, I think it’s a solid pick.
I think next pick can be anyone in the top 15… I had SJax in top ten so not a far reach
- jibbajabba614
- Senior
- Posts: 2410
- Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 6:32 pm
- GM: Milwaukee Bucks GM
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
Alright I’m done messaging teams about deals. I hate when people don’t respond.
I probably messaged everyone and heard back from maybe half of them. No thanks goes a long way
Reason when I rebuild even if team never gave a yes but responded I usually do deal. Michael Cage to Jazz I think was a deal I made just because he actually responded.
I probably messaged everyone and heard back from maybe half of them. No thanks goes a long way
Reason when I rebuild even if team never gave a yes but responded I usually do deal. Michael Cage to Jazz I think was a deal I made just because he actually responded.
-
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2022 6:49 pm
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
If we get lucky, Jax could be the fourth best player in the class. If we get unlucky, he could be nothing. I'm in position to just take the player with the highest upside and hope for the best. If he busts, I don't have a contender anyway. If he hits, we go from a 0% chance at ever winning with my core to maybe a 1% chance. Loljibbajabba614 wrote:If SJax gets the jump with defense at SG, I think it’s a solid pick.
I think next pick can be anyone in the top 15… I had SJax in top ten so not a far reach
IMO he was like our one chance at maybe adding a third cool young player, so I was willing to take the risk of trading up to get him. There was no one else outside of the top 3 who interested me in the position my team is in. If I was within reach of competing, there would maybe be some other guys I would consider. But for us, it makes sense in my opinion.
Kings
- pistolpetejr
- Senior
- Posts: 2965
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 2:48 pm
- GM: Los Angeles Clippers
Re: 1997 Draft Discussion
Literally the thing I hate the most.jibbajabba614 wrote:Alright I’m done messaging teams about deals. I hate when people don’t respond.
I probably messaged everyone and heard back from maybe half of them. No thanks goes a long way
Reason when I rebuild even if team never gave a yes but responded I usually do deal. Michael Cage to Jazz I think was a deal I made just because he actually responded.
---
PistolPeteJR
PistolPeteJR