Now that we know the draft order, who do we draft? (New thread)

If fultz, ball, jackson, and fox are gone I pray we take Smith over tatum. Tatums game just looks so bad for today's nba. Mid range 2s, not very athletic, short wing span, etc. I just see another Rudy Gay, Tobias Harris, Jeff green, type player.

@ockingsfan

I think they would take Frank at 9 if NY hasn't already. Frank in all likelihood will be solid to pretty good at running an offense and good to very good as a defender. He also shoots well in both catch and shoot and pull up jumpers from deep.

His physical profile is excellent for defense and for seeing over defenders on offense.

The biggest drawback most cite is simply a lack of a quick first step, and limited film (for us) to analyse.

I like him quite a lot. Maybe @Flopi can give us a little more insight.

I just think Dallas is a little too over zealous about their love for Frank N. considering they are typically tight lipped about who they want in the draft.

Also, scouting Frank N right now doesn't mean much, because he is the only top 12 talent still playing.

It just seems to scream smoke screen to me when a team is so public about their love for a player, especially when there are 8 teams picking before them.

In regards to your thoughts about Markkanen, Dirk recently came out and said Mavs will not be drafting Markkanen.
He also said there's no surprise that Dallas is looking for a PG. I think Dallas will take DSJ. If DSJ is gone, probably Ntilikina**. If all of the PGs are gone by the time they pick, they'll probably take BPA.

There's rumors that NYK really really like DSJ. However, Orlando was the first team to work out any prospect this year.. that player they worked out? DSJ. They also recently brought him back in for a 2nd interview. Looks like Knicks and Dallas could square-off for Ntilikina

Classic mis-direction by Dirk. I think dirk see a lot of himself in Markkaren.

I am sure Dallas likes Frank N too. But, I think their favorite player, that they hope falls to them is someone else. If that favorite player is gone, then Dallas could take Frank N. I just don't think he is the front runner for them.

I don't think it matters if Dallas likes Ntilikina or not. He'll most likely be a Knick unless somebody surprises and picks him earlier. As I said before, I'm hoping we get Fox or Jackson but if neither one of them falls to us at 5 I've come all the way around to wanting Ntilikina there over anyone else. I don't like Tatum at all, Isaac looks like a major project and I think he's a PF which makes him redundant with Skal and Willie. Dennis Smith is a super athlete and scorer but making him the pick at 5 just feels like throwing pieces together rather than building a team. We have scorers, we need standout defenders and that's not Smith at all. Same with Malik Monk and Lauri Markkanen. I'm not even thrilled about scooping these guys up if they fall to 10. They may be consensus BPA guys at that point but that rarely means much in retrospect. Group-think didn't figure out that Kawhi Leonard was the best player in the 2011 draft (picked 15th) or that Rudy Gobert was going to be the most dominant defensive big man since early-career Dwight Howard (picked 27th). So I'm not worried about perception. Get the guys who are the most likely to excel on this team with this coaching staff.

Fox is a two-way player with obvious leadership qualities. Jackson is a two-way player who plays like he's got a fire under his sneakers. They're a whole level of talent above anyone else except Fultz for me but I'm interested to hear if anyone has an outlier pick for us at 5. It's incredibly unlikely that there's more than 5 elite players in this class. Most drafts only have 1 or 2. I wonder if it might be a better strategy to look for the best combination of current skillset, potential, and fit with our picks instead of going all-in on superstar potential regardless of fit. I know BPA is the general rule we all use but take a look at any mock draft from the past decade and it's pretty obvious that BPA is a guessing game at best. So who would you take at 5 that isn't currently projected in the top 8 picks (Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Isaac, Smith, Monk)?

The next guy for me is is Zach Collins. The game is trending away from big guys but rim protection is still one of the most valuable skills to have. So if you have a rim protector and he can stay on the floor thats huge. Natural shooter. Rebounds. Fit wise I have no objections because I dont think neither Willie or PapaG are starters long term.
I really like Donovan Mitchell. Outstanding steal rate + good a/t-ratio and huge athleticism. That usually speaks for high upside (http://www.canishoopus.com/2014/2/26/5435374/potential-nba-draft-prospects). Makes winning plays. I buy his shot - only 36% from three but high number of attempts and 80% from the line. Givony said on LockedOnNBA Mitchell had one of best psychological testing so thats a plus as well.
Other than that it gets tough. Two "sleeper" picks are Patton and Hartenstein. Again I'm looking for the combination great physical tools + advanced skill set.

Makes me want to change my screen name.

Already seen enough from wcs and papa g huh? I still like both of their potential long term, especially Willie's. I'm out on Collins as a result.

I see Jonathan Wasserman has us taking Fox at 5 in a recent mock draft. He has Isaac at 4 and Tatum at 6.
I don't like his taking Justin Jackson at 10.
I don't believe Isaac has worked out for any teams yet but there seems to be some signs that he is trending to go before Tatum. In my opinion that is good if Fox is off the board by 5.

Now I know chances of this happening are slim but I can't help but feel that there will be a surprise or 2 in that 6-10 range. This would be excellent outcome for Kings, albeit a bit of a gar fetched one.

1. Fultz
2. Ball
3. Jackson
4. Isaac
5. Fox
6. Monk (but IMHO Tatum is a perfect fit here)
7. Markkanen
8. Ntilikina
9. Smith Jr.
10. Tatum

We can debate WCS' future, although I feel the same as biltalent, but if Collins is BPA, which at 10 I think he may be if one of the preferred PG/SFs aren't available, I think a team like the Kings aren't in a position to be passing on BPA (if that's how you feel about Collins, as we do). And I say that as someone who IS high on Papa, and believes he can be a quality starter type (WCS 'can' be too).

If any of the preferred consensus PG/SFs do not fall, and the decision is trading down or choosing between Mitchell/OG/Jackson etc, I think Collins is just a step ahead as a prospect, and dealing from a position of strength in terms of trades might be the route to go. I think most of us would prefer BPA to be PG/SF, but it may not be if you think Collins is quality compared to the rest who may still be on the board

But it's subjective. That's how I look at it as someone who loves Collins as a prospect, which others may or may not

I like them both as specialists that can give you 20 min of the bench. I think that is realistic right now. But of course they can always take an unexpected leap. Willie might get there after his navy seals training. Papa after transforming his body even more.

However so far I think you can make an easy argument that players like PapaG get completely played of the floor in the playoffs. And that is only getting more extreme next season. Big players like him only start in the regular season because this is still seen as some sort of anti war zone where you can play your bigs. But at the end of games and in the playoffs? No. Heck, the Pellicans even benched Cousins to close out games because he couldnt keep up. Ryan Anderson is playing center. So is Durant. So is LeBron.

Willie might have the physical tools to stay on the floor but judging by numbers he was one of the worst rim protectors in the NBA because he doesnt apply his athleticism on the defensive side. Of course I hope this changes next year! But so far the better bet is to not assume this.

So what we have is two 20 min centers + Skal who I think will play more center once he fills out. Please don't get me wrong, I am not advocating for another center. If we don't draft one I am completely fine. Long-term Papa can start, Willie can come of the bench, Skal can close. However the question from hrboild was who would you take after the top 8. And that is clearly Collins for me. He is so much further along than both Wcs and PapaG.

I have been looking at that pick 10 and it has me somewhat worried. Kings are stacked with SGs and I am 85% sure than Bogdanović will make his way to the NBA next season. So that means Hield, Temple, Bogdanović, Richardson.

However, I have been studying the top 10 draft picks and I suspect Monk might be the best available player there. I can certainly see him going higher but I can also see other teams passing him for prospects that are possibly equally talented but fill the position of need.

The other issue we have at 10 is that a lot of the players projected to go from 10-14 in a lot of mock drafts are PFs or Cs: Lauri Markkanen, Zach Collins, Jarrett Allen, TJ Leaf, Harry Giles, Justin Patton, John Collins (etc). If we take a look at our existing roster we have Skal Labissiere, Willie Cauley-Stein, Kosta Koufos, and Georgios Papagiannis under contract for next season. That would make drafting a center a questionable move because they are going to sit third or fourth on the depth chart. I suppose we could look at a PF like TJ Leaf or Lauri Markkanen, though neither are really projected to offer much on the defensive end.

So do we go after a small forward if our fifth pick is a PG? I've seen Justin Jackson speculated about because he is pretty polished. He can shoot the three and play defense. However, there is a question mark over his upside. Another option could be OG Anunoby, he's a pretty well rounded player that buys into the defensive end. Obviously the concern with him is his recovery from an ACL injury and the offensive side of his game needs some work, but he does have a lot of defensive potential.

If we get our SF with our fifth pick then is there a legitimate PG option at ten if Smith and Ntilikina are both off the board? I'm not sure there is. Some have speculated that Donovan Mitchell could be an option and perhaps play point guard, but his more natural position is SG like Malik Monk. So if it came down to a choice between Monk and Mitchell, I'd take Monk. So if we need to get a point guard then we might be best waiting for the second round and take a punt on one of the prospects potentially available at 34 like Jawun Evans (Oklahoma St), Frank Mason (Kansas), Monte Morris (Iowa St), Nigel William-Goss (Gonzaga), Frank Jackson (Duke), PJ Dozier (South Carolina), or Edmond Sumner (Xavier). The issue with one of these is exactly how NBA ready they are, what upside they have, and whether they would be the best choice at 34 but that could be the alternative if our point guard is not available at ten.

So to comeback to the original point about Malik Monk potentially being the guy available at ten, well, I would have no issue drafting him if we've drafted Fox/Ball or Tatum at five. Malik Monk has a lot of upside if he works hard and develops. Granted we have a lot of depth at SG but we can always try to package Malachi and/or Bogdanovic if we wanted to make a move to fill a hole at PG (if we don't get Fox or Ball at five) or SF (if we don't get Tatum at five). Having a number of talented young players is always a bonus when a team is rebuilding. The other thing to consider here is that Malik Monk has been talked about as a PG. Now I don't ever see him developing into a traditional point guard, but he could potentially be a Lou Williams or Monta Ellis like PG - i.e. a shooting guard that plays point that is a scoring player first, with average to above average passing. He could be that sixth man if we end up bringing back Collison or Lawson to start at the PG if we draft Tatum, or he could back up Fox if we go that way. It might not be an ideal scenario coming out with Fox and Monk, or Tatum and Monk, but there is no doubting Monk's talent and upside.

You really brought the issue to the forefront here: we have (or will have) way too many 2's that cannot realistically play the 1 or 3.

I think Temple is safe because he is a solid veteran that knows his role and can play solid defense at 1 or 2 and offense at the one in a motion-based offense (but not in iso or purely pick and pop offensive sets).

Buddy Buckets is the future. He is the safest player on the team. Owner loves him and Buddy gave validation as to why last season.

Richardson showed consistent good play last season but, to me, is one of the best trade chips the Kings have.

Ben McLemore can walk in free agency and as much as I hate giving up on him, we have an embarrassment of riches at the spot, especially if Bogdanovich comes over. My prediction is that he walks and develops into who we thought He could be somewhere else.

If Buddy is the future, Bogdanovich is the present. Bogdan can be incredibly valuable in that he has the ability to play the 1 or 2 in the NBA though he is more suited to play the 2. Yet, the ball handling, size, and decision making make it possible to put him and players like Buddy, Malachi, Garrett, Lawson, and Collison on the floor together.

With all of that said, I think the Kings start the season with:
Bogdanovich, Buddy, and Temple.

I think Vlade uses Richardson (and pieces) as trade bait to get either an extra top 20 draft pick this year or 1st rounder next year. And I think they make a token offer to Ben but ultimately someone else offers and he leaves.

I think it would be a big mistake to trade Richardson unless it involved moving up in the draft. He was an excellent pick at the 22nd (?) or so spot last year. Lit it up in the D League and then got hurt as soon as he was able to play big minutes in the NBA. While he is a valuable piece for us in our situation, he is low value for pretty much every team out there because he hasn't shown much in the NBA. I don't understand the need to trade him for seemingly a similar pick in a different draft where we would hope to draft a player in a position of need and then hope even more that they turn out as good as Malachi might. I would just let these guys battle it out on the depth chart and then send whoever loses out to the D League to refine their skills.

If your watching the series between the Cavs and Dubs, lots of 3 point shooting going on. If Markannen is there at 10, I'm taking the guy. We don't have that type of big who can knock down the 3.......need to forget position a bit and think what skill does he bring. He's going to be better than Kaminsky based on successes at early age.

But, the reality is that I think Markannen goes earlier to Minnesota.

Here's an interesting mock:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/6/...celtics-markelle-fultz-lonzo-ball-lakers-ucla

#5 Dennis Smith Jr (we pass on Fox AND Tatum)
#10 Frank Ntilikina

If we end up with two PG prospects I am not sure how I would feel about that scenario...

If Bogdanovic comes over that means Richardson to the D league. I don't mind but he sure might.

I don't want to give up on Malachi either because I think he will be a nice player, but I have a hard time seeing him getting minutes going forward. It's very doubtful he beats out Hield for the starting sg spot. Hield averaged 19 points on 43% shooting from 3 on the Kings. Unless that was a complete fluke then Hield has to start. Players that stretch the floor like that are must plays. Off the bench I think Garrett Temple beats him out as well. Temple isn't great in any one area, but is a savvy veteran and one of those guys you can sub into the game and trust to make correct plays and control the tempo. On top of that he is going to have to compete against Bogdan. I've heard some people say that Bogdan can play SF, but that's crazy. He would get eaten alive trying to guard 95% of NBA small forwards. It's a tricky situation because Richardson has potential, but unless something drastic happens there is a pretty strong chance that he just ends up riding the pine for the foreseeable future and we trade him for less than we could've received for him now. But like you said I would hope they if we trade him it's to move up in the draft this year or next.

I absolutely see Malachi off the bench playing some SF in 3 guard sets. Not worried about playing time. We aren't going to win so I'm fine playing some 3 guard sets for stretches. Lots of teams do it.

I think Hield averaged 15 for us but you are right that it's doubtful he will beat him out. Even though they are both rookies, Hield is a couple years older and NBA ready. Malachi has the potential to be just as good a scorer and a better defender than Hield but he's going to take some time to develop. Unless something crazy happens, he's 4th on the depth chart behind those guys, like you said.

But I still think there can be some room for him to play even if all those guys are ahead of him. Temple can play 1-3. Bogdan can play 1-2 (3 against very small lineups). Malachi can play 2-3. I don't like the idea of playing Malachi at SF but he can match up at the 3 against guys like Allen Crabbe and other non physical/dominate SF's. Now I don't advocate playing Temple or Bogdan big minutes at PG or Malachi and Bogdan playing big minutes at SF but there's certainly minutes to spread around, especially if someone gets hurt. And if we have to place Malachi in the D League for a few months, then so be it. Maybe he dominates the D League? Bogdan seems injury prone this year so I wouldn't rule out some time opening up if he comes over here.

We never develop players but a lot of young guys on good teams end up riding the pine for a couple years before they start playing big minutes. We could potentially be giving away a guy who we are pretty high on for a late first or early second round pick that more than likely doesn't amount to much at all. I'd rather just keep the possible steal we got late in the first round last year and at least let his value rise a bit before trading him off if there's no room for him.

Yeah, I don't see any way that Fox falls to #8 but every year there are draft surprises.

I DO think that if Fultz, Ball, and Jackson go top three that Isaac would be a strong option for the Suns at #4. So that part of the mock I agree with.

100% agree on Collins. He's my guy this draft. I think he's a flawless fit in today's NBA, especially as he continues to extend his range. He has some of the most natural rim protection instincts I've seen from a young big in a while. His timing when contesting shots is phenomenal. He's an excellent athlete and will be able to a good rim runner off the PnR and finish. Has the lateral quickness to defend on the perimeter and can play the 4 or the 5 (again, very important in today's NBA). He has a very advanced post game with a bunch of moves already in his arsenal that most NBA bigs cant do. As you said, he gets after it on the glass too and is constantly looking to make an impact with his energy/hustle.

I think we're running into the perfect storm with him likely being available at 10. Had he played 30 MPG this year and if this weren't such a stacked class, he'd be an easy top 3-5 pick in most drafts. Hell, last year I would have taken him #2 over Ingram. Think he has legit 2-way star upside

Ah, the beauty of positional flexibility. WCS has it, Collins has it, and Skal probably will have it once he works on his body more. All 3 guys are very athletic and have the lateral quickness to defend on the perimeter. That's why I'm not overly concerned with Collins or any of our bigs getting playing time; he's completely interchangeable at the 4 and 5.

Completely agree on Papa. He showed some good flashes at the end of last year and I think he'll stick in the league as a good rotational guy, but he would have been played off the court against every playoff team aside from Utah and maybe OKC.

I'm starting to feel good about Fox being there at 5 when we draft. It's starting to look like the Suns could be taking Isaac at 4, which would crush my dream of an Isaac/Fox draft haul, but really makes the rest of the top 10 interesting because it opens up a chance that a second top level PG drops to ten. If we're on the clock at ten and the best talent on the board is a second Point Guard, do we go Kahn and pull the trigger under the assumption you take the best talent, do you reach for another position, or do you try to trade back?

If the top five go:

1. Fultz
2. Ball
3. Jackson (I could see Ball and Jackson flipped but would be surprised if either slipped past 3)
4. Isaac
5. Fox

Then the next five could definitely go

6. Tatum
7. Markkanan (I can't see them taking a PG here after Dunn last year, and I don't think Monk fits with Lavine and Wiggins, and Markannen does fit)
8. Monk (really good fit in the triangle)

So at ten, you know either Frank N. or DSJ is going to be there, and you already have Fox. I could see passing on Frank N., but if DSJ is there, and he could be arguably the most talented player in the draft could you really pass on him because you already drafted a PG? I strangely could see DSJ becoming a Bobby Jackson type of 6th man since he's a score first PG.

For me, if it's DSJ on the board I take DSJ and endure being compared to Kahn... If it's Frank N. or Monk I probably work really hard to find a trade back (maybe use ten and one of Portland's not completely toxic contracts to take all 3 Portland picks, and then maybe look to snag another first or future first with the remaining cap space)

Yes we are very fortunate that every team after maybe Orlando doesn't have center as a primary need

6 - Orlando. 6 is high. Vuc/Biyombo
7. I'm hoping and assuming they see KAT as a center if Isaac is selected
8.Ive read they like Porzingis at C and have Willy
9. Noel

I think Frank Ntlinkina is going to slide to #12 to #15. He's a project and kid who put in 4 PPG in a mediocre Euroleague. His appeal is as a guy who can guard two positions but he's a long way off.

I agree...I can't get excited about him. None of the guys at ten are very exciting though and we have to take someone there.