I don't see the Kings trading up. A lot of posters do see it, or it's what they want to see, but I don't see anything said by Vlade or his team to suggest they want to trade up. I think it's more likely that Vlade is confident in his team's ability to snatch two quality players with the 5 & 10 picks. And given our need for talent, isn't that the path forward?
Now that we know the draft order, who do we draft? (New thread)
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
It's not that the Kings will add an impact free agent. It's that it handcuffs them completely for three years just to get a mid/late 1st round pick. You can't talk about what a tough spot Portland is in and then turn around and convince me that it's a great idea to put the Kings in the exact same spot.
#5, #10, the rights to perhaps the best player in Europe, and a young center with great size and athleticism who just turned it on at the end of last season?
That's more than enough for Fultz. In fact, I'd say it's way too much for Fultz. Fultz absolutely has to turn out to be John Wall value or better for that offer to even make sense, and I'm going to go against the grain here and say that I don't see that. I mean, Fultz looks like he's going to be good, and I understand that there's a reason that people are drooling over Fultz, but he led the Huskies to an 0-13 finish and a 2-17 in-conference record (counting the Pac-12 tournament) and an RPI of 210. Their most impressive victory came against RPI #99 Colorado at home, and they needed OT to get that. They had exactly one more win over teams with an RPI under 200 (#174 Western Michigan, also at home) on the season. Now I know you can throw some shade at teammates and coach, but he was the leader of that team, and they were downright terrible for all the stats he put up. I am far from convinced on Fultz.
That's more than enough for Fultz. In fact, I'd say it's way too much for Fultz. Fultz absolutely has to turn out to be John Wall value or better for that offer to even make sense, and I'm going to go against the grain here and say that I don't see that. I mean, Fultz looks like he's going to be good, and I understand that there's a reason that people are drooling over Fultz, but he led the Huskies to an 0-13 finish and a 2-17 in-conference record (counting the Pac-12 tournament) and an RPI of 210. Their most impressive victory came against RPI #99 Colorado at home, and they needed OT to get that. They had exactly one more win over teams with an RPI under 200 (#174 Western Michigan, also at home) on the season. Now I know you can throw some shade at teammates and coach, but he was the leader of that team, and they were downright terrible for all the stats he put up. I am far from convinced on Fultz.
It's not "a" pick. Just want to make sure you're clear on that.
And what is wrong with being "handcuffed" from a cap perspective if you're not going to be able to sign anyone significant? We'd have #5, #7, #20, #34, 2018 1st, 2018 2nd, Hield, Bogdanovic, Richardson, Labissiere, Cauley-Stein, & Papagiannis as the future.
Ahh but it's not the exact same spot! Do we have two stars in their prime right now (Lillard - 27, McCollum - 26)? We absolutely do not. We're in no rush to try and surround star players with more help. We can be patient and forego our cap flexibility (especially if it brings back more youth/picks and especially if we're not going to be close to competitive in a few years) without it hurting our future.
And what is wrong with being "handcuffed" from a cap perspective if you're not going to be able to sign anyone significant? We'd have #5, #7, #20, #34, 2018 1st, 2018 2nd, Hield, Bogdanovic, Richardson, Labissiere, Cauley-Stein, & Papagiannis as the future.
Ahh but it's not the exact same spot! Do we have two stars in their prime right now (Lillard - 27, McCollum - 26)? We absolutely do not. We're in no rush to try and surround star players with more help. We can be patient and forego our cap flexibility (especially if it brings back more youth/picks and especially if we're not going to be close to competitive in a few years) without it hurting our future.
Ok you don't see him as a franchise guy, that's fine.
As of now there are quite a few people who do. I think if we had the 3 instead of the 5 it may be possible, and I mean may. Total control of a possible franchise level talent for 8 years is gonna cost big time.
This is one of those cases where maybe you say pshhhh no thanks, but what you are offering wouldn't be accepted either.
As of now there are quite a few people who do. I think if we had the 3 instead of the 5 it may be possible, and I mean may. Total control of a possible franchise level talent for 8 years is gonna cost big time.
This is one of those cases where maybe you say pshhhh no thanks, but what you are offering wouldn't be accepted either.
I think IF we move up, it's with Philly for a Jackson - Monk swap. I also wouldn't mortgage to much to move up period. We can take BPA at 5 and also fill an actual need at either PG or SF without giving up anything.
You give away assets and put all the eggs in one basket, where are you if that player has a career altering injury? It's improbable but not impossible.
If we can move up to grab Jackson within reason and the FO feels he fits the vision they have, I can see that happening.
I think it unlikely we move to 1st because what Boston would want is, to me, going to be too much and too risky.
You give away assets and put all the eggs in one basket, where are you if that player has a career altering injury? It's improbable but not impossible.
If we can move up to grab Jackson within reason and the FO feels he fits the vision they have, I can see that happening.
I think it unlikely we move to 1st because what Boston would want is, to me, going to be too much and too risky.
@Iced Espresso
If we grab Fox (or Smith) at 5, and Isaac is gone at 10, then OG has to be heavily considered. I wouldn't be unhappy with Collins at 10 but it creates possible wrinkles. I am not sold on Markannen as helping us. Not at this stage of a rebuild. Not a lights out shooter with only potential to get better in basically every other facet of his game. Lastly, not at his size/position. If your going to grab a big where we are stronger than elsewhere, you grab one with all around talents.
If not for his injury I would be wholeheartedly advocating for OG at 10 if we take a guard at 5. A lot hinges on his health. I know most don't see him amounting to much offensively, but I disagree. It depends how your trying to play.
OG takes smart shots if there, and was good in fast breaks, often caused by his defense. We want up tempo ball moving offense precipitated by stifling defensive pressure? Then you add Fox and OG to WCS,Skal and Buddy. I am biased towards this scenario so feel free to dismiss
If we grab Fox (or Smith) at 5, and Isaac is gone at 10, then OG has to be heavily considered. I wouldn't be unhappy with Collins at 10 but it creates possible wrinkles. I am not sold on Markannen as helping us. Not at this stage of a rebuild. Not a lights out shooter with only potential to get better in basically every other facet of his game. Lastly, not at his size/position. If your going to grab a big where we are stronger than elsewhere, you grab one with all around talents.
If not for his injury I would be wholeheartedly advocating for OG at 10 if we take a guard at 5. A lot hinges on his health. I know most don't see him amounting to much offensively, but I disagree. It depends how your trying to play.
OG takes smart shots if there, and was good in fast breaks, often caused by his defense. We want up tempo ball moving offense precipitated by stifling defensive pressure? Then you add Fox and OG to WCS,Skal and Buddy. I am biased towards this scenario so feel free to dismiss
It appears that the Kings will be holding their first workout tomorrow, May 18th. Most of the players invited appear to be players in play for the Kings 2nd round pick. Here's the list:
Wesley Iwundu (G – 6’7” 205 lbs.) Kansas State
Brynton Lemar (G – 6’4” 195 lbs.) UC Davis
Landen Lucas (C – 6’10” 240 lbs.) Kansas
Eric Mika (C – 6’10” 233 lbs.) BYU
Naz Mitrou-Long (G – 6’4” 203 lbs.) Iowa State
Tai Webster (G – 6’4” 188 lbs.) Nebraska
One player of note that I like is Wesley Iwundu. Great size for a SG whose able to play some SF as well.
Wesley Iwundu (G – 6’7” 205 lbs.) Kansas State
Brynton Lemar (G – 6’4” 195 lbs.) UC Davis
Landen Lucas (C – 6’10” 240 lbs.) Kansas
Eric Mika (C – 6’10” 233 lbs.) BYU
Naz Mitrou-Long (G – 6’4” 203 lbs.) Iowa State
Tai Webster (G – 6’4” 188 lbs.) Nebraska
One player of note that I like is Wesley Iwundu. Great size for a SG whose able to play some SF as well.
@Iced Espresso
If we grab Fox (or Smith) at 5, and Isaac is gone at 10, then OG has to be heavily considered. I wouldn't be unhappy with Collins at 10 but it creates possible wrinkles. I am not sold on Markannen as helping us. Not at this stage of a rebuild. Not a lights out shooter with only potential to get better in basically every other facet of his game. Lastly, not at his size/position. If your going to grab a big where we are stronger than elsewhere, you grab one with all around talents.
If not for his injury I would be wholeheartedly advocating for OG at 10 if we take a guard at 5. A lot hinges on his health. I know most don't see him amounting to much offensively, but I disagree. It depends how your trying to play.
OG takes smart shots if there, and was good in fast breaks, often caused by his defense. We want up tempo ball moving offense precipitated by stifling defensive pressure? Then you add Fox and OG to WCS,Skal and Buddy. I am biased towards this scenario so feel free to dismiss
If we grab Fox (or Smith) at 5, and Isaac is gone at 10, then OG has to be heavily considered. I wouldn't be unhappy with Collins at 10 but it creates possible wrinkles. I am not sold on Markannen as helping us. Not at this stage of a rebuild. Not a lights out shooter with only potential to get better in basically every other facet of his game. Lastly, not at his size/position. If your going to grab a big where we are stronger than elsewhere, you grab one with all around talents.
If not for his injury I would be wholeheartedly advocating for OG at 10 if we take a guard at 5. A lot hinges on his health. I know most don't see him amounting to much offensively, but I disagree. It depends how your trying to play.
OG takes smart shots if there, and was good in fast breaks, often caused by his defense. We want up tempo ball moving offense precipitated by stifling defensive pressure? Then you add Fox and OG to WCS,Skal and Buddy. I am biased towards this scenario so feel free to dismiss
If Isaac is gettable in a not so costly move up, or at 10 you take him because of his high ceiling.
But if its not possible to get Isaac, and the team doctors give you the thumbs up OG intrigues me.
We could use a tough guy on the floor.
Going out on a limb here. If Fox is there at 5 take him and the PG problem is addressed. From what I know now of Fox I like a lot.
At 10 most likely Isaac is gone so we have not filled our SF need. I would be fine with Zach Collins and figure out a way to fill the SF position outside of the draft or see what Detroit thinks about trading up two spots to get the guy they want.
Stanley Johnson has been brought up before to mixed opinions but the 10th and consideration for the 12th and Stanley makes some sense. We could then go for a player like OG without so much worry about his injury history. Both known for their defense both good size. Let the better man get the majority of the minutes.
At 10 most likely Isaac is gone so we have not filled our SF need. I would be fine with Zach Collins and figure out a way to fill the SF position outside of the draft or see what Detroit thinks about trading up two spots to get the guy they want.
Stanley Johnson has been brought up before to mixed opinions but the 10th and consideration for the 12th and Stanley makes some sense. We could then go for a player like OG without so much worry about his injury history. Both known for their defense both good size. Let the better man get the majority of the minutes.
So many options and calculations, and as always, a lot of surprises at draft night. So i won't hit my head at the wall too much before that, or however you say that
Realistically, Fox is our #5 pick and it would be great in my opinion. I watched that guy a lot this year, and really liked him. If he raises his outside shooting ability at another level, he could be a star. Point guard position is our priority at this draft, so why taking a risks? But, we do need a SF as well, so if somehow Josh Jackson falls to 5th, and Fox is still available, then i would have to think twice. Those two are my favourites (beside Ball) in this draft generation, so i hope one of them will be free at #5. I'm "not sold" (as you say here ) at Tatum at all.
Realistically, Fox is our #5 pick and it would be great in my opinion. I watched that guy a lot this year, and really liked him. If he raises his outside shooting ability at another level, he could be a star. Point guard position is our priority at this draft, so why taking a risks? But, we do need a SF as well, so if somehow Josh Jackson falls to 5th, and Fox is still available, then i would have to think twice. Those two are my favourites (beside Ball) in this draft generation, so i hope one of them will be free at #5. I'm "not sold" (as you say here
) at Tatum at all.
The net result of your trade (other than adding Turner, Crabbe, Aminu, Leonard and Harkless - none of whom I want at all) is moving up from #10 to #7 and getting #20.
Well, it's a stretch to say we'd "have" Bogdanovic if there's only $4.1 million in caproom left to sign him with. But even if that's the case, the issue would be that it makes it harder to complete any trades when you're at the salary cap limit. A mismatched roster with one rookie point guard with no backup and four shooting guards is one that needs flexibility to trade pieces and this would damage that. It also means having to cut a player next season (likely meaning dead cap for years) just to be able to sign the rookie drafted in 2018. Rebuilding teams should use caproom to absorb bad contracts in exchange for assets but blowing it all in one fell swoop for #15 and #20 in a draft that isn't particularly deep and hamstringing the team for three years seems excessive to say the least.
To me this makes it much worse. At least Portland has a core to build around. The Kings would be using up all of their caproom, making it harder to make deals going forward, and locking themselves into a roster and generally getting into a tough position without even having a clear direction going forward.[/quote]
Well, it's a stretch to say we'd "have" Bogdanovic if there's only $4.1 million in caproom left to sign him with. But even if that's the case, the issue would be that it makes it harder to complete any trades when you're at the salary cap limit. A mismatched roster with one rookie point guard with no backup and four shooting guards is one that needs flexibility to trade pieces and this would damage that. It also means having to cut a player next season (likely meaning dead cap for years) just to be able to sign the rookie drafted in 2018. Rebuilding teams should use caproom to absorb bad contracts in exchange for assets but blowing it all in one fell swoop for #15 and #20 in a draft that isn't particularly deep and hamstringing the team for three years seems excessive to say the least.
To me this makes it much worse. At least Portland has a core to build around. The Kings would be using up all of their caproom, making it harder to make deals going forward, and locking themselves into a roster and generally getting into a tough position without even having a clear direction going forward.[/quote]
Most top prospects won't agree to go head-to-head but it's an especially bad idea for a player like Ball whose calling card is playmaking.
I think if Ball is there at 3 Philly jumps on him. He's a great playmaker but can work with or without the ball and isn't horribly ball dominant. And his shot is funky but very effective. He'd be almost ideal with Simmons and Embiid. I thought if the Sixers jumped into the top two and the Lakers fell out giving Philly their pick that Ball and Monk would be a near perfect backcourt for them.
I think if Ball is there at 3 Philly jumps on him. He's a great playmaker but can work with or without the ball and isn't horribly ball dominant. And his shot is funky but very effective. He'd be almost ideal with Simmons and Embiid. I thought if the Sixers jumped into the top two and the Lakers fell out giving Philly their pick that Ball and Monk would be a near perfect backcourt for them.
Well, it sounds like Philly is kind of deadset at trying Simmons at literal PG on the offensive side. If so, then Monk becomes even more perfect for them, as a great shooter from the 2 who then slips over to guard the 1 on the defensive end (because Simmons will have to switch up). While you can never have too many passers, the Sixers might well be wasting Ball's skills if they want to essentially play him as a 2. But Monk at #3 is probably a bit of a reach, whereas maybe not so much at 5. I don't think Ball will slip past the Lakers, but if he did I can see Philly thinking they don't need him as much as they need Monk + whatever else it takes.
It's the "whatever else it takes" that I'm not sure about - what Philly would demand and what exactly I'd be willing to give up.
It's the "whatever else it takes" that I'm not sure about - what Philly would demand and what exactly I'd be willing to give up.
They can have Malachi!
I'm guessing they'd want #5 and #10. That seems too steep for me. Ball scares me. He's got the funky shot, the inability to turn the corner or penetrate consistently, struggles to guard quick PGs and hasn't shown that he can be nearly as effective in the half court and running the pick and roll. And yet he showed up at UCLA and transformed their offense and made them a winner. I tend to think he'll end up being a very successful pro. Still, I'll be a bit relieved if he goes #2 and the Lakers take the risk of his game not translating or being as effective in the NBA.
I'm guessing they'd want #5 and #10. That seems too steep for me. Ball scares me. He's got the funky shot, the inability to turn the corner or penetrate consistently, struggles to guard quick PGs and hasn't shown that he can be nearly as effective in the half court and running the pick and roll. And yet he showed up at UCLA and transformed their offense and made them a winner. I tend to think he'll end up being a very successful pro. Still, I'll be a bit relieved if he goes #2 and the Lakers take the risk of his game not translating or being as effective in the NBA.