Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Mitch McGary at #24 a "Lock"?


bLACKpANTHER

Recommended Posts

Honestly I'm fine with PJ at 9 there's most likely better options there but still.. All homerism aside I think he's going to be a great pro and fits what we need perfectly

#9 Hairston

#24 Warren

Would be great IMO

I really don't want McDermott or McGary

 

Warren won't be there at 24. Projected early to late teens. A lot of teams are high on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love Mcgary a lot. Very good and fast running the floor, as good of passer as kevin love, great at stealing the ball even from smaller gaurds. He's really good. I don't see how anyone could complain with getting him at 24 if he falls that far. The Spurs have already promised him if he makes it that far. If the Spurs have promised him, that should tell you something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I'm fine with PJ at 9 there's most likely better options there but still.. All homerism aside I think he's going to be a great pro and fits what we need perfectly

#9 Hairston
#24 Warren

Would be great IMO

 

Warren won't be there at 24. Projected early to late teens. A lot of teams are high on him.

 

we could trade our #9 pick for the two suns picks or bulls picks (in the mid first) and pick both up - hell if #9 wasnt enough you could throw in #24 as well... if we did that id be tempted to use the higher of the two on warren as i think he's more coveted than PJ at this point (and there is more SG's that are available to pick).

 

if we are to keep the #9 & 24 picks id be tempted by KJ McDaniels for the later pick if we're after another SF. the guy is raw offensively and wont be as NBA ready as warren, but has the essence of kawhi leonard about him, and we know how much clifford loves his defence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cot damn it just screw defense for this draft. Just draft guys that can SCORE. I mean thats what we have needed for the last freaking 3 years.  We have like 3 lottery picks that dont even average double digit points i mean jesus christ just get some offense. This is all starting to annoy me.....One more day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cot damn it just screw defense for this draft. Just draft guys that can SCORE. I mean thats what we have needed for the last freaking 3 years. We have like 3 lottery picks that dont even average double digit points i mean jesus christ just get some offense. This is all starting to annoy me.....One more day.

Yeah let's draft nothing but offense and depend on rookies to score.

Let's also screw a major reason this team was competitive and in the playoffs. Defense doesn't mean poo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah let's draft nothing but offense and depend on rookies to score.

Let's also screw a major reason this team was competitive and in the playoffs. Defense doesn't mean poo.

 

Not even gonna try to figure out wtf you are getting at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yep. I was hoping for and calling for a day three guy. But I didn’t research the position to say if we should or should‘t have jumped at a particular guy at a particular spot.    And everything I read said it was a poor draft for RBs depth wise. I guess when Seattle takes a backup RB in the 1st, that kind of backs that up.    I definitely think we should keep 4 running backs and if King can play well enough then keep him too.    I believe I heard Canales say we are a running team (talking about drafting a WR he will be needing to block as well as catch). Well if we are gonna be a running team by identity we don’t need to stock the WR room to overflowing. If one room has to sacrifice, it should not be the RB room given our circumstances. 
    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
    • I just saw the funniest thing...or very disappointing, depending how you handle misery. A guy on YouTube did a 2027 'way too early' mock draft.  If I told you the simulator has the Panthers selecting in the top 10 , what would you say?  If I told you it was pick #8 and only two QBs were taken in the top 7, what would you say?  If I told you this dude had us taking a defensive player, what would you say?
×
×
  • Create New...