Jump to content

How Did We Do In the 1st Round  

50 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Overall Grade?

  2. 2. How would you grade the Ziaire Williams pick at #10?

  3. 3. How would you grade the Santi Aldama pick at #30?


  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 08/14/21 at 08:31 AM

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, King Dork said:

You are 100% correct. 
 

I literally said I wouldn’t have done it tho lol. But I would also rather have him than Duarte or Kispert or Wagner

 

I don't know. Can we be honest? Or is the board in please welcome these young men to Memphis mode, so we can't be honest anymore?

I was on the board all day yesterday. Nobody wanted him. Then we reach for him at 10, and he's suddenly the belle of the ball. At least I'm consistent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this front office has earned our collective trust for now. could that trust be broken? absolutely, but they have proven, to date, to be trustworthy.

if zw hits, wow.

 

slim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ole Dirty Klondike said:

I went B straight down. Whoever the idiot was who started this poll should have given the option for plusses and minuses. Geez Louise 🙄 I don't generally personally insult people on this board but what a dolt

Anyway:

Overall:B-

Williams: I'll say B-. Nothing against him. The way I looked at the draft is there was a top tier of 3 guys and a second tier of 3-4 more players and then just a slew of guys, probably 10-12 or so  on that third tier. He was on that third tier with so many other players that were mentioned. If we wanted to make a trade, I would have liked to have moved into that second tier. With all of that being said, his biggest knock is the low shooting %. I'm not so concerned about that if he can create his own shot, put the ball on the floor and play above the rim. If he can create his own shot but is missing the shot, I'm fine with that because you can get shooting coaches to help with that. He was clearly in their pool of guys. He clearly had a good vibe with the front office and thought about being here and wanted to be here. I'll go so far as to say, he would have been disappointed if he wasn't picked by us (via the Pels). I don't know if he will contribute much next year. He may be at least 1 if not 2 years away from contributing on a consistent basis but he has a lot of the intangibles and the athletic ability, he just has to fix his shot. I will buy that COVID thing affecting him last year as well. He lost 2 uncles and was not really on Stanford's campus. I can't be a jerk and say "he should have rose above that", no, he was an 18 year old kid and he was clearly affected. I'm fine with the pick but no one will ever be able to tell me he wasn't going to be there at 17. I don't think he's any better or worse than anyone else you could have selected at 10. I would have given the same grade if it were Bouknight or Moody, mainly because we made a trade to take on 2 bad contracts, nothing to do with Williams himself. 

Aldama: B- . I almost gave him a C as a neutral grade but it sounds like the Grizz really scouted this kid and made him a promise so they obviously wanted him. Will he here next year? Not sure. I'll bump him up a lil bit to a B- cause I for one am not that familiar with him. Maybe some of our Spanish posters can give more insight. I know FBS posted about him in a different thread. 

You created the poll did you forget? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The J Crew said:

I don't know. Can we be honest? Or is the board in please welcome these young men to Memphis mode, so we can't be honest anymore?

I was on the board all day yesterday. Nobody wanted him. Then we reach for him at 10, and he's suddenly the belle of the ball. At least I'm consistent. 

I think that's hyperbole. Maybe a few posters were against him, but I never commented either way and I'm sure others didn't either.

I have no idea if he will be good or not - he certainly has some upside and seems to want to work for it. Who knows.

I won't pretend that he was ever a favorite of mine, but it does seem like a few GMs and draft "experts" liked the kid.

He wasn't the upside pick that most favored - that's true. But he's still an upside pick. It is what it is.

They say they didn't believe he would be there at 17 based on intel - so it's only a reach if you think he would've been there at 17. If he was in their top 3 (Giddey/Wagner/Ziaire for example) and he was the last one standing at 10, then there you go. In other words, if he was THEIR guy and getting him meant moving up, then it's not a reach - not in their eyes. I'm not sure I 100% believe that, but that's what was said/implied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Grizz&Grind said:

I think that's hyperbole. Maybe a few posters were against him, but I never commented either way and I'm sure others didn't either.

They say they didn't believe he would be there at 17 based on intel - so it's only a reach if you think he would've been there at 17. If he was in their top 3 (Giddey/Wagner/Ziaire for example) and he was the last one standing at 10, then there you go. In other words, if he was THEIR guy and getting him meant moving up, then it's not a reach - not in their eyes. I'm not sure I 100% believe that, but that's what was said/implied.

If it's hyperbole, then find one poster who said they wanted Ziaire yesterday.

And seriously, you're believing a GM after a draft?  What is Kleiman supposed to say? "Yeah, we wanted Wagner or Giddy, but they were both gone,. We really tried hard to trade up, but Golden State was shocked Kuminga was there. So we took this guy."  

And I didn't want Ziaire at 17 either. So I don't care if he was there at 17 or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to give it a D. It might work out, but too much was given up for 2 risky picks. Neither will help us compete this year, and likely not next year. Long term projects are dime a dozen. Not what you build your franchise around. We should have been able to find someone at #10 who could contribute now, and develop with play time. Ironically our #40 pick fits that bill better than our #10, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The J Crew said:

I don't know. Can we be honest? Or is the board in please welcome these young men to Memphis mode, so we can't be honest anymore?

I was on the board all day yesterday. Nobody wanted him. Then we reach for him at 10, and he's suddenly the belle of the ball. At least I'm consistent. 

I still don’t want him 🤣🤣

But…

6 minutes ago, memphis slim said:

I think this front office has earned our collective trust for now. could that trust be broken? absolutely, but they have proven, to date, to be trustworthy.

if zw hits, wow.

 

slim.

^This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Grizz&Grind said:

I think that's hyperbole. Maybe a few posters were against him, but I never commented either way and I'm sure others didn't either.

I have no idea if he will be good or not - he certainly has some upside and seems to want to work for it. Who knows.

I won't pretend that he was ever a favorite of mine, but it does seem like a few GMs and draft "experts" liked the kid.

He wasn't the upside pick that most favored - that's true. But he's still an upside pick. It is what it is.

They say they didn't believe he would be there at 17 based on intel - so it's only a reach if you think he would've been there at 17. If he was in their top 3 (Giddey/Wagner/Ziaire for example) and he was the last one standing at 10, then there you go. In other words, if he was THEIR guy and getting him meant moving up, then it's not a reach - not in their eyes. I'm not sure I 100% believe that, but that's what was said/implied.

Where is everyone hearing this Kleiman quotes from? Been searching since I woke up and can’t find it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, King Dork said:

I still don’t want him 🤣🤣

But…

^This

Yeah, some of you guys are a lot bigger on this front office than I am. After the Pels trade, and then this draft, my guess is more people are coming to my point of view.

Let's face it, totally lucking out and jumping to #2 to get Ja puts a glossy sheen on everything. He's like LeBron, who I don't like but can admit the obvious, Ja makes everyone around him better.

Without lucking into Ja, we probably finish 13th the last two years, and the opinion on this FO is drastically different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, King Dork said:

Where is everyone hearing this Kleiman quotes from? Been searching since I woke up and can’t find it

Not missing much. He did the usual GM post draft interview. We wanted everyone we drafted. Had to move up because of "intel", 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dwash said:

You created the poll did you forget? 

C'mon man. I'm not Chip 😁

10 minutes ago, The J Crew said:

Umm . . . maybe ODK was using self-deprecation to be humorous???  

Bingo bango!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The J Crew said:

Yeah, some of you guys are a lot bigger on this front office than I am. After the Pels trade, and then this draft, my guess is more people are coming to my point of view.

Let's face it, totally lucking out and jumping to #2 to get Ja puts a glossy sheen on everything. He's like LeBron, who I don't like but can admit the obvious, Ja makes everyone around him better.

Without lucking into Ja, we probably finish 13th the last two years, and the opinion on this FO is drastically different. 

I disagree with you here.  We have seen bad front office's work.  This FO has taken a real crap sandwich and turned it into a promising future.  That was not done by lucking into the #2 alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gradey said:

I disagree with you here.  We have seen bad front office's work.  This FO has taken a real crap sandwich and turned it into a promising future.  That was not done by lucking into the #2 alone. 

Mostly it's Ja.

At the end of last year, the starters were Ja and 4 guys from the Wallace/Hollinger regime. You'll never hear that anywhere, but it's true.

I like the Bane and Xavier picks. Good job there, Zach and Cho and the rest.

But the Miami and Pels trades were terrible. This draft is bad. Giving Guduric the BAE was bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The J Crew said:

Yeah, some of you guys are a lot bigger on this front office than I am. After the Pels trade, and then this draft, my guess is more people are coming to my point of view.

Let's face it, totally lucking out and jumping to #2 to get Ja puts a glossy sheen on everything. He's like LeBron, who I don't like but can admit the obvious, Ja makes everyone around him better.

Without lucking into Ja, we probably finish 13th the last two years, and the opinion on this FO is drastically different. 

Id still rather trade JV and push our youth into bigger roles which is risky no doubt. To me Clarke,jones,allen,17 should have been on the trade block but 2 for 1 type deals , i mean every team would do those if they were that easy lol  . I guess id rather bet on our youth before trading JV for a Josh Jackson , Winslow  our whatever shiny young underperforming guy thats on the block . 10th pick is checking more boxes than most the players i see floated around on here.  I dont love the deals after a nice surprising year but if we wanted to move JV and bet on youth to take over id bet on our current players + picks .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ole Dirty Klondike said:

C'mon man. I'm not Chip 😁

Bingo bango!

😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The J Crew said:

If it's hyperbole, then find one poster who said they wanted Ziaire yesterday.

And seriously, you're believing a GM after a draft?  What is Kleiman supposed to say? "Yeah, we wanted Wagner or Giddy, but they were both gone,. We really tried hard to trade up, but Golden State was shocked Kuminga was there. So we took this guy."  

And I didn't want Ziaire at 17 either. So I don't care if he was there at 17 or not. 

 

Yeah, nobody had the Grizzlies picking Zaire, and few had him in top 15.  I didn't do that much research, but in my prediction poll, besides the  consensus "Top 5" guys, and then the 4 guys taken from 6-9, I had 6 potential guys listed.  I remember considering writing in Ziaire because the CA had done a preview of him, but didn't think much of it and was tired of writing guys out.  

Of all those non top 5 guys, I thought the only guy that probably wouldn't fall to 10 was Bouknight.

 

I don't know what the Spurs were doing drafting Primo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grizzled Vet said:

 

Yeah, nobody had the Grizzlies picking Zaire, and few had him in top 15.  I didn't do that much research, but in my prediction poll, besides the  consensus "Top 5" guys, and then the 4 guys taken from 6-9, I had 6 potential guys listed.  I remember considering writing in Ziaire because the CA had done a preview of him, but didn't think much of it and was tired of writing guys out.  

Of all those non top 5 guys, I thought the only guy that probably wouldn't fall to 10 was Bouknight.

 

I don't know what the Spurs were doing drafting Primo.  

Spurs were being kind to us, so no one could give us the worst first round draft grade.

And the Kings taking Davion at 9? Just wow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, King Dork said:

Where is everyone hearing this Kleiman quotes from? Been searching since I woke up and can’t find it

 

This is classic Memphis Grizzlies media.  You would think they would have at least Zach's interview on their webpage.  They might not have the highlights ready to go, but at least someone from FO or coaching talking about it would be good.

I saw Keiman's interview on the CA website.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The J Crew said:

Spurs were being kind to us, so no one could give us the worst first round draft grade.

And the Kings taking Davion at 9? Just wow. 

The Kings taking Davion is stunning.

I know you shouldn't draft for need, and if people in their FO believed that he was by far the best player out there, I suppose they did the right thing, but they have a very deep guard group.

(Wonder if they would trade Delon now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From KOC at The Ringer, a "C" and a "C+" for our two picks. https://nbadraft.theringer.com/draft-grades

MEMPHIS GRIZZLIES

Wow, this is the first reach in years from the Grizzlies, and maybe the first pick of theirs I’ve disagreed with in recent memory. Memphis traded up to no. 10 to take Williams, who was a top high school recruit, but had ups and downs during his freshman season at Stanford. Anyone with his size, score, and fluidity has a chance to become a long-term success, but he’s still very raw at this stage of his career. He is a good positional fit next to Ja Morant, but his selection provides more questions than answers. 

Grade: C

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to be wrong, but I gave it a big F.   I was reluctantly generous and gave a D for the Santi Aldama pick, but I don't know why.  You know - picking someone surprisingly early is one thing.  But trading away assets to pick someone surprisingly early when your existing pick probably is sufficient to get that person is another.  Total head-scratcher from my vantage point.  And then - we did it twice in the same draft.  This was a well-deserved F.  

1ysybm.jpg

I don't mean to offend the players at all.  It's not their fault they were chosen.  They should be happy.  This may have been a good draft if done on the players' near-peak projections a year ago.  I just think the trading away of assets was almost certainly unnecessary.  But - bygones and well-wishes - I hope it turns out great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, The J Crew said:

Mostly it's Ja.

At the end of last year, the starters were Ja and 4 guys from the Wallace/Hollinger regime. You'll never hear that anywhere, but it's true.

I like the Bane and Xavier picks. Good job there, Zach and Cho and the rest.

But the Miami and Pels trades were terrible. This draft is bad. Giving Guduric the BAE was bad. 

You conveniently left out quite a bit of good moves. At the time of the Gasol-Jonas trade, there was mass speculation that Kleiman was already calling the shots. If you don't want to give him credit for that and want to give Wallace credit for what would have been his first good move since the core four came together, then so be it. I credit Kleiman with that. Other than that debate, you left off the Conley trade, which I feel we have won. You left off the trade Javon Carter-D'Anthony Melton trade, which we won plus got a look at a troubled but talented player in Jackson. Even though Jackson didn't work out, we won that trade because Melton is so much better than anyone else involved. You left off us getting a first round pick to pay Iggy. I am mad that Iggy refused to play for us. Even so, we picked up a first that may kick in when Golden State is on the decline. I call that a win as well. Yes the Ja pick was an easy one that just about everyone would have made. But they killed every other pick. 

So I may not like this pick, but I am willing to give it a chance. I also think every front office has hits and misses. Miami trade was bad. I said it at the time and it turned out bad. Pelicans trade looks bad now but if Williams is good, it's a win. Or if the Lakers pick becomes something, it's still a win. So that one is up in the air. Guduric was a terrible move but one they got out from under really quickly and relatively painlessly. This front office has done well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lsugrizzfan said:

You conveniently left out quite a bit of good moves. At the time of the Gasol-Jonas trade, there was mass speculation that Kleiman was already calling the shots.

Which is absurd revisionist history. 

Sorry, no need to read the rest about that BS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lsugrizzfan said:

You conveniently left out quite a bit of good moves. At the time of the Gasol-Jonas trade, there was mass speculation that Kleiman was already calling the shots. If you don't want to give him credit for that and want to give Wallace credit for what would have been his first good move since the core four came together, then so be it. I credit Kleiman with that. Other than that debate, you left off the Conley trade, which I feel we have won. You left off the trade Javon Carter-D'Anthony Melton trade, which we won plus got a look at a troubled but talented player in Jackson. Even though Jackson didn't work out, we won that trade because Melton is so much better than anyone else involved. You left off us getting a first round pick to pay Iggy. I am mad that Iggy refused to play for us. Even so, we picked up a first that may kick in when Golden State is on the decline. I call that a win as well. Yes the Ja pick was an easy one that just about everyone would have made. But they killed every other pick. 

So I may not like this pick, but I am willing to give it a chance. I also think every front office has hits and misses. Miami trade was bad. I said it at the time and it turned out bad. Pelicans trade looks bad now but if Williams is good, it's a win. Or if the Lakers pick becomes something, it's still a win. So that one is up in the air. Guduric was a terrible move but one they got out from under really quickly and relatively painlessly. This front office has done well.

Nobody is infallible.

What if the top 10 protected NO pick next year is 11 and turns into that third "star" to go along with Ja and Jaren.

Then Kleinman is hailed again.

These things ebb and flow and there are no guarantees.

All we can do is watch the next few seasons play out for better or worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×