Kings possible draft picks game
- Thread starter Glenn
- Start date
On draft day when we are certain that the pick is ours and not going to the Bulls, I don't see why we can't.
If we keep we probably will get a kid that is as ready as McLemore which a meh right now.
We got a franchise player in DMC, we have a 2nd punch in Rudy. The last kid I would wait to bloom on this team is just McLemore.
If we wait another kid to bloom, good luck holding on to DMC.
If we keep we probably will get a kid that is as ready as McLemore which a meh right now.
We got a franchise player in DMC, we have a 2nd punch in Rudy. The last kid I would wait to bloom on this team is just McLemore.
If we wait another kid to bloom, good luck holding on to DMC.
S
That's not true lol
That's not how the draft works anyways. We might get a kid who is ready like Michael Carter Williams or a kid who is NBA ready like a lot of draftees in their rookie year. What about a player like Hibbert or Klay Thompson or Steph Curry...and the list goes on.
This is the most stacked draft in years. Many of these guys are NBA ready and many of them will only need about a season to adjust. I have no doubt about that. Some of these guys like Stein are ready to be shot blockers in the NBA. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to learn that role. Ben Mac is having a hard time because his game suited college basketball perfectly. Unfortunately, it didn't translate over to the NBA well enough. So, he's learning to be more of an individual player and to put the ball on the floor and make a play.
I doubt we get a top 5 draft pick but crazier things have happened. If we get a top 5 pick then we have an NBA ready player already.
That's not how the draft works anyways. We might get a kid who is ready like Michael Carter Williams or a kid who is NBA ready like a lot of draftees in their rookie year. What about a player like Hibbert or Klay Thompson or Steph Curry...and the list goes on.
This is the most stacked draft in years. Many of these guys are NBA ready and many of them will only need about a season to adjust. I have no doubt about that. Some of these guys like Stein are ready to be shot blockers in the NBA. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to learn that role. Ben Mac is having a hard time because his game suited college basketball perfectly. Unfortunately, it didn't translate over to the NBA well enough. So, he's learning to be more of an individual player and to put the ball on the floor and make a play.
I doubt we get a top 5 draft pick but crazier things have happened. If we get a top 5 pick then we have an NBA ready player already.
MCW have padded stats because the sixers have all the time in the world to let the kids learn.
Hibbert was a liability for 2 seasons turned into a better player in his 4th and became an All-star in East who clearly lack big man competition in their conference.
Curry is defensive liability and no more than just a shooter in his first 3 seasons.
Aren't you guys tired on waiting on players to bloom who may later become too expensive too match when their ready(cough Tyreke cough Evans). Even Lebron took years before getting respect.
Malone on his initial interview targeted his 2nd season to make the playoffs. Waiting on another kid will not help that cause.
The biggest chance we can hang to and bargain with Rudy after next season is to make it to playoffs in his 2nd year here.
You can say that DMC's contract goes beyond that, but his patience may not go beyond that.
Our franchise player is having an All-Start season, next season bring him to the playoffs as a reward.
Best chance for that is add a proven player and not another project.
Hibbert was a liability for 2 seasons turned into a better player in his 4th and became an All-star in East who clearly lack big man competition in their conference.
Curry is defensive liability and no more than just a shooter in his first 3 seasons.
Aren't you guys tired on waiting on players to bloom who may later become too expensive too match when their ready(cough Tyreke cough Evans). Even Lebron took years before getting respect.
Malone on his initial interview targeted his 2nd season to make the playoffs. Waiting on another kid will not help that cause.
The biggest chance we can hang to and bargain with Rudy after next season is to make it to playoffs in his 2nd year here.
You can say that DMC's contract goes beyond that, but his patience may not go beyond that.
Our franchise player is having an All-Start season, next season bring him to the playoffs as a reward.
Best chance for that is add a proven player and not another project.
Kobe's camp was targeting Lakers, and was discouraging everyone from drafting him. That's why he was falling. Petrie wanted to draft him anyway.
Kings were taking it to low seed PO teams on their court. They will fight for low seed next year, barring major injuries. Thing is gap to elite teams looks really sizable. Team still need talent, and by that I mean talented defensive players, whose offense allows them to stay on the court. Mortgaging your future is a sure way to guarantee Cousins' eventual walk, when team is bouncing in 1st round year after year.
Kings were taking it to low seed PO teams on their court. They will fight for low seed next year, barring major injuries. Thing is gap to elite teams looks really sizable. Team still need talent, and by that I mean talented defensive players, whose offense allows them to stay on the court. Mortgaging your future is a sure way to guarantee Cousins' eventual walk, when team is bouncing in 1st round year after year.
Future does not necessarily mean draft pick to me now. If Kings get a guy like Sanders, they have have just locked their front court for the next 5 years.
Rudy at SF for 1 more or maybe more. If he leaves, you got a good space there for more legit signings.
Kings can trade JT/MT/Landry for good vets to man the point regardless of what IT's future might be.
The last goldern era of the Kings did not bloom by without acquiring legit vets. JWill for Bibbby, Christie from Toronto, Webber, Divac. Only Peja was a Kings pick in the starting 5. We already have that franchise draft picks in DMC and Ben. Next round, we get those ready players and not projects. Otherwise, we will get used to ping pong balls every year.
Rudy at SF for 1 more or maybe more. If he leaves, you got a good space there for more legit signings.
Kings can trade JT/MT/Landry for good vets to man the point regardless of what IT's future might be.
The last goldern era of the Kings did not bloom by without acquiring legit vets. JWill for Bibbby, Christie from Toronto, Webber, Divac. Only Peja was a Kings pick in the starting 5. We already have that franchise draft picks in DMC and Ben. Next round, we get those ready players and not projects. Otherwise, we will get used to ping pong balls every year.
So you would pass on Parker or Embiid? You do know that we have Cousins under contract for four more years after this season, right? We in all likely hood will have a pick in the top ten, and if so, there's an execellent chance we'll at worse end up with Cauley-Stein, or Vonleh. Both have the potential to be very good basket defenders in the NBA, and we'd have them at a very cheap rate for four years, instead of 11 million a year for three more years that we would have to pay Sanders. I'm just not willing to gamble on a player with a big contract that at the moment is underachieving.
Embiid is the only guy I would not pass on this draft.
I'm still not convinced that drafting Parker or Wiggins and trading Rudy will really be a step forward for this franchise.
I don't think CS and Vonleh could be effective right away in the NBA. It's very rare for "non-lottery" defensive big man to immediately bring an impact to the NBA. It took years for Hibbert, Ibaka, or even Motumbo to get respected in the paint.
Again, Cousins is having an All-star season now. The last thing you want to say to this kid is to wait for another 2 years to finally become a serious team.
And ya, I know that Cousins is under contract for 4 more years after this season. If the Kings let him wait for another 2 season to get a legit team, I doubt those 4 more years will pass without begging that he be traded.
I'm still not convinced that drafting Parker or Wiggins and trading Rudy will really be a step forward for this franchise.
I don't think CS and Vonleh could be effective right away in the NBA. It's very rare for "non-lottery" defensive big man to immediately bring an impact to the NBA. It took years for Hibbert, Ibaka, or even Motumbo to get respected in the paint.
Again, Cousins is having an All-star season now. The last thing you want to say to this kid is to wait for another 2 years to finally become a serious team.
And ya, I know that Cousins is under contract for 4 more years after this season. If the Kings let him wait for another 2 season to get a legit team, I doubt those 4 more years will pass without begging that he be traded.
Given the physicality Vonleh plays with coupled with his athleticism and skill level, I can guarantee, he will look like solid third big with average defense by the end of his rookie season. Embiid will take more time, but he and Cuz would create absolutely ridiculous pairing. Wiggins will be an above average defender by the end of his first year as SG/SF. So is Smart at PG/SG.
I think people underestimate how valuable draft picks can be. For starters, they are on dirt cheap, long term contracts. It's very easy for a player on a rookie deal to outperform his contract thus making his value a plus. However, when you have vets like Landry who are earning 6.75 mil a year, there's a very low probability that he outplays his contract and a much higher probability that he will underplay his contract.
As a small market team, you typically don't see a team with more than 3 double digit contracts ($10 mil+ per year). If Cousins and Gay represent two of them, that leaves room for one more. Whether you like it or not, we're not going to be signing a SG to a big contract, as it would be a waste of McLemore's contract and potential. So that either leaves signing a floor general at PG or a defensive anchor at PF. Well the good news is that we could probably find either one with our draft pick. Exum/Smart as a floor general and Embiid/Vonleh/Cauley-Stein as a defensive anchor. By trading the pick away for Sanders (a defensive anchor who would be our third double digit contract), you force us to try and find a floor general on a cheap deal in free agency. Good luck with that.
I think keeping the pick would be the smartest thing for this franchise going forward. Let's say we draft Exum with our pick. Well we have our future floor general on a cheap rookie deal. We have our 3 and D (hopefully he becomes a 3 and D) athletic SG on a cheap rookie deal. We have our #2 option SF locked up on a big deal. We are still missing our rim protecting PF. And we have our #1 option C locked up on a big deal. In 2015, we are set to have 25 mil in cap room. That should give us plenty of cap space to find our defensive anchor. D. Jordan, T. Chandler, Asik, M. Gasol, R. Lopez, and T. Thompson are all up for new contracts in that year.
Let's say we draft Vonleh with our pick to fill in as that rim protecting PF of the future. We will have all of our pieces in place except for our floor general at PG. Again in 2015 when we will have substantial cap room, Rondo, Rubio, Dragic, & Lin are all possible options to fill that void.
So we could either end up with a team that looks like this...
PG - Exum
SG - McLemore
SF - Gay
PF - D. Jordan
C - Cousins
or looks like this...
PG - Rondo
SG - McLemore
SF - Gay
PF - Vonleh
C - Cousins
This is why I'm really for keeping draft picks and players on rookie deals. It gives you much more flexibility and you can net some pretty high return on investments. OKC is a prime example. They have their two stars and rim protector locked up on big, long term deals, and then they have a plethora of rookie contract players that contribute and fill around the stars (Jackson, Lamb, Jones, Roberson, and Adams - and they will add two more 2014 1st round picks next year). Their team is setup to be competitive for a long, long time. I would love the Kings to mirror them so we don't have to go through these decade droughts of not reaching the playoffs. The key for small market teams is to never overpay your roleplayers (unfortunately, the new ownership's first signing was just that), and when most of your roleplayers are on rookie deals, you don't have to worry about it.
As a small market team, you typically don't see a team with more than 3 double digit contracts ($10 mil+ per year). If Cousins and Gay represent two of them, that leaves room for one more. Whether you like it or not, we're not going to be signing a SG to a big contract, as it would be a waste of McLemore's contract and potential. So that either leaves signing a floor general at PG or a defensive anchor at PF. Well the good news is that we could probably find either one with our draft pick. Exum/Smart as a floor general and Embiid/Vonleh/Cauley-Stein as a defensive anchor. By trading the pick away for Sanders (a defensive anchor who would be our third double digit contract), you force us to try and find a floor general on a cheap deal in free agency. Good luck with that.
I think keeping the pick would be the smartest thing for this franchise going forward. Let's say we draft Exum with our pick. Well we have our future floor general on a cheap rookie deal. We have our 3 and D (hopefully he becomes a 3 and D) athletic SG on a cheap rookie deal. We have our #2 option SF locked up on a big deal. We are still missing our rim protecting PF. And we have our #1 option C locked up on a big deal. In 2015, we are set to have 25 mil in cap room. That should give us plenty of cap space to find our defensive anchor. D. Jordan, T. Chandler, Asik, M. Gasol, R. Lopez, and T. Thompson are all up for new contracts in that year.
Let's say we draft Vonleh with our pick to fill in as that rim protecting PF of the future. We will have all of our pieces in place except for our floor general at PG. Again in 2015 when we will have substantial cap room, Rondo, Rubio, Dragic, & Lin are all possible options to fill that void.
So we could either end up with a team that looks like this...
PG - Exum
SG - McLemore
SF - Gay
PF - D. Jordan
C - Cousins
or looks like this...
PG - Rondo
SG - McLemore
SF - Gay
PF - Vonleh
C - Cousins
This is why I'm really for keeping draft picks and players on rookie deals. It gives you much more flexibility and you can net some pretty high return on investments. OKC is a prime example. They have their two stars and rim protector locked up on big, long term deals, and then they have a plethora of rookie contract players that contribute and fill around the stars (Jackson, Lamb, Jones, Roberson, and Adams - and they will add two more 2014 1st round picks next year). Their team is setup to be competitive for a long, long time. I would love the Kings to mirror them so we don't have to go through these decade droughts of not reaching the playoffs. The key for small market teams is to never overpay your roleplayers (unfortunately, the new ownership's first signing was just that), and when most of your roleplayers are on rookie deals, you don't have to worry about it.
Last edited:
This doesn't have to be either/or. You can draft players and wait for them to develop and still make other moves to improve the team. You don't have to give up one to gain the other. That's just nonsense. If I have to wait a couple of years to end up with a Hibbert or a Curry, then I'm happy waiting, because its very hard to acquire those kind of players any other way. We didn't lose Tyreke because we couldn't afford to pay him, we lost him because the Kings management didn't think he was worth what he was asking. Now you can agree or disagree with that decision, but it had nothing to do with their ability, or willingness to pay. The fact that they traded for Gay and his huge contract bears that out.
Take a look at the Thunder. Every core player on that team was drafted by them. The Spurs drafted almost every key player on their team. Both teams are very successful. Yes, it takes patience, but the reward is usually a team that stays together for a long time and stays competitive for a long time. I realize you can do other ways as well, like the Celtics did or the Heat have done, but your stay at the top is short lived, and its also difficult to do in when your a smaller market like Sacramento. Cousins leaving isn't the problem. He's a loyal guy, and as long as he's convinced that the team is moving in the right direction, he'll be on board. He's said several times that he doesn't want to chase a championship by going to a contender, he wants to turn a team into a contender, and thus, he wants to turn the Kings into a contender. I think that if you looking for instant gratification, your looking in the wrong place.
Having said all that, I think we'll make the playoffs next season. And that's whether we draft a great player or not. I'm sure PDA has at least one more move up his sleeve, and it won't take much to make this team a playoff team next season. Its not that far away right now. But remember, there's a difference between being a playoff team, and being a contender for a championship. Were still a few years away from that goal, and that's where the young drafted players usually come into play. Two or three years from now when they're starting to reach their potential, is when the team will start looking like a championship team. That's if we draft wisely of course. And we choose wisely in the freeagent market.
To follow up on trading our pick. Yes, of course we can draft a player and then trade that player to another team on draft day as part of a larger deal, and I'm not opposed to that, if its the right deal and the player we trade doesn't have superstar potential. For instance, it would take a lot for me to trade away Embiid or Parker. I'd have to think hard about trading Wiggins or Exum. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't do it. As I said, it would depend on the trade. But I wouldn't be out there looking for takers either. They would have to come knocking on my door with an offer. Point is, there are a few players in this draft that would/could be a final piece in some area on the team. And sometimes that final piece doesn't have to be a star in the strict sense of the word. All he has to be is a piece that fills a glaring hole, as in a shotblocker, or as in, a pass first PG with good size that can play defense. A player like Embiid, even though still raw, could be the difference in 5 to 10 wins that we might other wise lose.
Take a look at the Thunder. Every core player on that team was drafted by them. The Spurs drafted almost every key player on their team. Both teams are very successful. Yes, it takes patience, but the reward is usually a team that stays together for a long time and stays competitive for a long time. I realize you can do other ways as well, like the Celtics did or the Heat have done, but your stay at the top is short lived, and its also difficult to do in when your a smaller market like Sacramento. Cousins leaving isn't the problem. He's a loyal guy, and as long as he's convinced that the team is moving in the right direction, he'll be on board. He's said several times that he doesn't want to chase a championship by going to a contender, he wants to turn a team into a contender, and thus, he wants to turn the Kings into a contender. I think that if you looking for instant gratification, your looking in the wrong place.
Having said all that, I think we'll make the playoffs next season. And that's whether we draft a great player or not. I'm sure PDA has at least one more move up his sleeve, and it won't take much to make this team a playoff team next season. Its not that far away right now. But remember, there's a difference between being a playoff team, and being a contender for a championship. Were still a few years away from that goal, and that's where the young drafted players usually come into play. Two or three years from now when they're starting to reach their potential, is when the team will start looking like a championship team. That's if we draft wisely of course. And we choose wisely in the freeagent market.
To follow up on trading our pick. Yes, of course we can draft a player and then trade that player to another team on draft day as part of a larger deal, and I'm not opposed to that, if its the right deal and the player we trade doesn't have superstar potential. For instance, it would take a lot for me to trade away Embiid or Parker. I'd have to think hard about trading Wiggins or Exum. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't do it. As I said, it would depend on the trade. But I wouldn't be out there looking for takers either. They would have to come knocking on my door with an offer. Point is, there are a few players in this draft that would/could be a final piece in some area on the team. And sometimes that final piece doesn't have to be a star in the strict sense of the word. All he has to be is a piece that fills a glaring hole, as in a shotblocker, or as in, a pass first PG with good size that can play defense. A player like Embiid, even though still raw, could be the difference in 5 to 10 wins that we might other wise lose.
Something must be wrong. I find myself agreeing with you far too much!
Believe it or not, I've moved Vonleh ahead of Randle on my personal board. More because of fit than anything else. I think Randle will be a very good player, but I don't think he's a good fit for the Kings. Vonleh on the other hand, is taller, longer, a very good rebounder like Randle, but a much better post defender with shotblocking potential. He also has a very nice outside shot, which Randle has yet to display.
Believe it or not, I've moved Vonleh ahead of Randle on my personal board. More because of fit than anything else. I think Randle will be a very good player, but I don't think he's a good fit for the Kings. Vonleh on the other hand, is taller, longer, a very good rebounder like Randle, but a much better post defender with shotblocking potential. He also has a very nice outside shot, which Randle has yet to display.
Something must be wrong. I find myself agreeing with you far too much! Believe it or not, I've moved Vonleh ahead of Randle on my personal board. More because of fit than anything else. I think Randle will be a very good player, but I don't think he's a good fit for the Kings. Vonleh on the other hand, is taller, longer, a very good rebounder like Randle, but a much better post defender with shotblocking potential. He also has a very nice outside shot, which Randle has yet to display.
Believe it or not, I've moved Vonleh ahead of Randle on my personal board. More because of fit than anything else. I think Randle will be a very good player, but I don't think he's a good fit for the Kings. Vonleh on the other hand, is taller, longer, a very good rebounder like Randle, but a much better post defender with shotblocking potential. He also has a very nice outside shot, which Randle has yet to display.
Vonleh is a surprisingly good ballhandler as well. In regards to Randle, he showed a different overall game in some of his highschool, and all star games like the Nike Summit etc, that I saw. . He played some face up game where he would put the ball on the floor and take it to the basket, and also showed a decent jumpshot. I haven't seen much, if any of that at Kentucky. I suspect that has more to do with Calapari than anything else. My point is that there's probably more there than what were seeing. Similar to Cousins, when no one knew he could shoot the ball from the outside, or handle the ball as well as he does.
I just think that what Vonleh brings is a better fit than what Randle brings. Vonleh can help spread the floor if need be. He shoots well enough from the outside that you have to guard him. Randle is more of a low post player. Move him to the perimeter to make room for Cuz, and maybe no one goes out to guard him, making it too easy to double Cousins. Plus Vonleh has shotblocking potential. Both are good rebounders. Randle may end up being the bigger star down the road, but Vonleh may do more to make us a winner.
I just think that what Vonleh brings is a better fit than what Randle brings. Vonleh can help spread the floor if need be. He shoots well enough from the outside that you have to guard him. Randle is more of a low post player. Move him to the perimeter to make room for Cuz, and maybe no one goes out to guard him, making it too easy to double Cousins. Plus Vonleh has shotblocking potential. Both are good rebounders. Randle may end up being the bigger star down the road, but Vonleh may do more to make us a winner.
The negative I see in Randle is his ability to finish in a crowd. I've seen him several times have difficulty in that regard. He gets his shot blocked or altered more than you would like when he's under the basket. If he has difficulty in college, he's really going to struggle initially in the NBA under the basket. He needs space to operate.
You would be right. That's why you, or anyone, has to watch a lot of games to get a true picture of a player. Watch just one game, and you might just see that players best game of the year, or his worse game of the year. Players are human beings, and they have their ups and downs just like we do. They have their good days and their bad days. Some also improve as the year goes on, so the player you see at the beginning might not be the player you see at the end. To most, college is as big an adjustment as is the adjustment from college to the NBA. Most, who were the stars of their highschool team, are now just another player in the rotation. Most go from playing 25 to 30 minutes a game in highschool, to sometimes 5 or 10 minutes a game in college. The Parkers, and Randles are the exceptions.
The Parker's and the Randle's may get the minutes, but they also get the pressure, scrutiny, and expectations that comes with those minutes. How does a player that starts off with a bang, handle the adjustments he has to make along the way when defenses are designed to stop him. Does he continue to force things that aren't working anymore, or does he find new ways to help his team, some of which won't show up on a stat sheet. I'm not much of a stat guy when is comes to judging players, especially at the college level, but sometimes its the only tool you have to support your subjective judgment. And, sometimes it doesn't. The only true way to judge if a player is having an impact on a game, is to watch the game.
Intangibles don't show up on stat sheets. Marcus Smart is a prime example of that. To me, most of what makes Smart valuable are his intangibles. And to be honest, sometimes that's enough. Kenneth Faried is a player that brings more intangibles than he does talent, and in his case, its apparently enough. Personally, I'd rather bet on a player that brings both talent and intangibles, but then, so would everyone else.
The Parker's and the Randle's may get the minutes, but they also get the pressure, scrutiny, and expectations that comes with those minutes. How does a player that starts off with a bang, handle the adjustments he has to make along the way when defenses are designed to stop him. Does he continue to force things that aren't working anymore, or does he find new ways to help his team, some of which won't show up on a stat sheet. I'm not much of a stat guy when is comes to judging players, especially at the college level, but sometimes its the only tool you have to support your subjective judgment. And, sometimes it doesn't. The only true way to judge if a player is having an impact on a game, is to watch the game.
Intangibles don't show up on stat sheets. Marcus Smart is a prime example of that. To me, most of what makes Smart valuable are his intangibles. And to be honest, sometimes that's enough. Kenneth Faried is a player that brings more intangibles than he does talent, and in his case, its apparently enough. Personally, I'd rather bet on a player that brings both talent and intangibles, but then, so would everyone else.
Randle is dropping on my board. Johnny O'Brient III of LSU: 29 pts off 20 shots; 9 rebs, whereas Randle was 6 points off of 11 shots; 5 rebs. Sometimes the stats don't mirror the reality on the floor, but that wasn't the case in this game. O'Brient had a major impact on the game; Randle was a bit player.
Randle isn't showing up against bigger players. See the LSU game and the Tennessee game (Stokes mauled Kentucky on the boards with 15 rebs; Randle had 2). He's not very good in a crowd; he's a guy who needs space; doesn't make much of an impact on D either. Randle played like a smallish 4, not a big 4. Randle is reminding me more and more of PPat with more athleticism to take guys off the dribble. He can be very good in space, but he's going to get outphysicalled in the paint a lot in the NBA. His skill set seems more appropriate for a 3. I can see him having "tweener" issues.
By the way, Stein is also moving down on my board for similar reasons. Against LSU and Tennessee he was outplayed by physical players. Kentucy isn't a top 5 team for some very good reasons, despite all the accolades about their players.
Randle isn't showing up against bigger players. See the LSU game and the Tennessee game (Stokes mauled Kentucky on the boards with 15 rebs; Randle had 2). He's not very good in a crowd; he's a guy who needs space; doesn't make much of an impact on D either. Randle played like a smallish 4, not a big 4. Randle is reminding me more and more of PPat with more athleticism to take guys off the dribble. He can be very good in space, but he's going to get outphysicalled in the paint a lot in the NBA. His skill set seems more appropriate for a 3. I can see him having "tweener" issues.
By the way, Stein is also moving down on my board for similar reasons. Against LSU and Tennessee he was outplayed by physical players. Kentucy isn't a top 5 team for some very good reasons, despite all the accolades about their players.
Kentucky isn't a top five team because they don't have a quality PG. Andrew Harrison hasn't lived up to his billing and has struggled all season long except for a couple of games. Now, what do you say when I've seen Johnny O'Bryant struggle against other bigs as well. Same with Stokes. Why, per chance do you think both these guys had big games against Randle, and not against some other teams on a regular basis? Because Randle has a target on his back, and every other big in college gets up to play against him. What is just another game for Randle, is a big game for the likes of Stokes and O'Bryant.
I've seen Randle play too many times against good competition and succeed to just write him off because, one, he's probably getting tired and beat up a little, and two, because other teams are designing their defenses around stopping him. If you take a good look at the Kentucky team, they've yet to find a consistent outside shooter. So, if you can stop them from scoring inside, and they can't hit their outside shots, you have a good chance of beating them. So who do they have to stop to limit their inside scoring? Randle!. Just about every time Randle touches the ball in the paint now, he gets collapsed on by two or three players. I don't give a damm how good you are, no one can score when their doubled and tripled every time. Nor should they try. Randle's game is nothing like Robinson's. Robinson had little to no post game, and thrived almost totally on his athleticism. He didn't grab rebounds because of technique, but because he was quicker to the ball. Randle is a fundamentally sound rebounder. He blocks out and he's also stronger than Robinson.
There's nothing wrong with Cauley-Stein either, other than his propensity to get into early foul trouble, which then limits his time on the floor. In the games where he get two quick fouls, you can almost bet he'll have a less than productive game. In the games where he doesn't get into foul trouble, he usually has good games. Stein is what he is. He's a good rim defender and a very good pick and roll defender. He's a decent rebounder, and a guy that will usually score on alley opps and putbacks. If your expecting more than that, then you'll be disappointed. But he could be a very good defender at the NBA level. No guarantee's. Randle will be a good player, and maybe a very good player. That said, I don't see him as a good fit on the Kings for obvious reasons. He lives in the post, and so does Cousins when he's at his best.
I've seen Randle play too many times against good competition and succeed to just write him off because, one, he's probably getting tired and beat up a little, and two, because other teams are designing their defenses around stopping him. If you take a good look at the Kentucky team, they've yet to find a consistent outside shooter. So, if you can stop them from scoring inside, and they can't hit their outside shots, you have a good chance of beating them. So who do they have to stop to limit their inside scoring? Randle!. Just about every time Randle touches the ball in the paint now, he gets collapsed on by two or three players. I don't give a damm how good you are, no one can score when their doubled and tripled every time. Nor should they try. Randle's game is nothing like Robinson's. Robinson had little to no post game, and thrived almost totally on his athleticism. He didn't grab rebounds because of technique, but because he was quicker to the ball. Randle is a fundamentally sound rebounder. He blocks out and he's also stronger than Robinson.
There's nothing wrong with Cauley-Stein either, other than his propensity to get into early foul trouble, which then limits his time on the floor. In the games where he get two quick fouls, you can almost bet he'll have a less than productive game. In the games where he doesn't get into foul trouble, he usually has good games. Stein is what he is. He's a good rim defender and a very good pick and roll defender. He's a decent rebounder, and a guy that will usually score on alley opps and putbacks. If your expecting more than that, then you'll be disappointed. But he could be a very good defender at the NBA level. No guarantee's. Randle will be a good player, and maybe a very good player. That said, I don't see him as a good fit on the Kings for obvious reasons. He lives in the post, and so does Cousins when he's at his best.
I'm somewhat dubious about the point guard being the reason Kentucy is in the bottom third of the top 20. I'm on the fence leaning against that position. When you see a couple of guys dismantle them inside it's hard for me to point at the pg. I'll be entertaining your position when I view upcoming games.
Regarding Stokes and O'Bryant, you have a point, except for the fact that nobody is talking about them being potentially top 5 picks.
Regarding Stokes and O'Bryant, you have a point, except for the fact that nobody is talking about them being potentially top 5 picks.
Kentucky operates a dribble drive offense, which relies heavily on their PG. Actually, just about any college team that doesn't have good guard play won't go far in the tournament. Kentucky hasn't been able to get any kind of consistent outside shooting out of their guards. If you look at the games that they win easily, you'll find that it was one of those games where Aaron Harrison or Young, or both, were hitting their shots. In the games when their shots aren't falling, then the other teams defense just collapses into the post, and makes it very hard on Randle and Stein to be effective. Andrew Harrison, has had trouble getting into the lane, especially when he has to go up against a zone. And his shooting has been horrible. Put Tyler Ennis on that team, and I'd bet you see a whole different result.
Remember, in college a defender can live in the post, which can make it very difficult for post players to operate. Not true in the NBA. That's why Thabeet was effective in college, but not in the NBA.
Remember, in college a defender can live in the post, which can make it very difficult for post players to operate. Not true in the NBA. That's why Thabeet was effective in college, but not in the NBA.
Kobe probably wouldn't have developed into the great player he is today with the kings. Lots of fans say we should have taken someone else in the draft, but who really knows how they would have turned out? If we had drafted Barnes instead, everyone would be calling him a bust. Barnes' only good playing stretch was in the playoffs last year.. same thing goes for other players.
nonononononononononononono to randle!!! no!!!! Another great offensively player who lacks defense. If we were drafting for offense I'd pick Doug McDermott all the way. I think he can a huge scorer in the NBA if he's given the minutes, but if not, I see him as a player like Ryan Anderson, Kyle Krover, and etc.
Dante Exum is the only player who I'd want in the top7.. if he's not there, we should trade back and get two first rounders or a first rounder and a 2nd rounder. I honestly hope we don't go anywhere near Randle. Please no Randle... I'm hoping he isn't near where we are drafting.. Top 5 would be a perfect draft position for the kings.
Dante Exum is the only player who I'd want in the top7.. if he's not there, we should trade back and get two first rounders or a first rounder and a 2nd rounder. I honestly hope we don't go anywhere near Randle. Please no Randle... I'm hoping he isn't near where we are drafting.. Top 5 would be a perfect draft position for the kings.