Draft position thread

[bajaden]

Unlike others I personally don't think that our team heading into last offseason was that bad. If the Suns could win 47 games this year after only winning 25 last year (+22), if the Blazers could win 53 games this year after only 33 last year (+20), the good ol Charlotte Bobcats could win 42 after only 21 last year (+21), Raptors (+14) taking on half of our supposed toxic players... Wizards have been below .500 since 2008, this year won 43 games. Meanwhile, we at best can win one more game than we did last season, and this is with the supposed best center in the NBA future HOFer DeMarcus Cousins. The Lakers have literally been a D-league team this year, and still only loss 2 more games than we did.

Of course the easy thing is to just shrug and say "DAMN YOU MALOOFS YOU SCREWED US OVER!". The fact is that we had potential on the team. Sure, Petrie screwed some things up, but let's not act like the GMs of all the other teams I mentioned were perfect either. There is absolutely no excuse for our team to have done as poorly as they did this season. Blame it on the players, on the coach, on the GM, whatever. Just don't tell me that I can't have expected us to win 10 more games than last season when all these other teams are doing so, one of which with 3 of our rotation players from the start of the season. Phoenix also just got a new coach - they seem to have turned things around pretty quick.

As I said before, maybe next season things turn around and whatever moves PDA made this season pay off for us in the long run. Maybe this time next season we're sitting on at least 40 wins. If that's the case, like I said, PDA would deserve credit every bit as much as he deserves discredit right now.

I really don't want to belabor this. I could go team by team and make a case why each team is different than the Kings. I'll simplify it by saying that the only team that really surprised me was Phoenix. It looked like they were doing it with smoke and mirrors. Plumlee went from being an afterthought, to a solid contributor. All I can say is well done!. Portland and Charlotte both are teams that already had a lot of their pieces in place. Portland was now injury freee, and Charlotte added Al Jefferson, and took off.

The Kings at the beginning of the season were a team still on the way down, or had just reached the bottom. By that, I mean they still had a lot of pieces on the team that needed to be moved, and that wasn't going to be an easy job. I suspose that one could argue that the team just needed a tweak here and there, but I would disagree. I agree that it would have nice to see how the trio of Cousins, Gay and Tyreke would have fared, but it wasn't meant to be. And while some say we would have won at least 40 games with Tyreke on the team, there's no guarantee of that.

Anyway, I'm not going to go through our entire roster. Lets just say that we had a lot of ill fitting pieces on the team. We still have some, and until we get at least 8 or 9 players that are keepers. That are part of our core going forward, were going to struggle. We don't have a backup shooting guard, or as some would say, we have a backup shooting guard, but we don't have a starter. We don't have the shotblocker we need next to Cousins. We don't yet have a starting PG (my opinion). Our SF position is still unsettled, and will be until we know what Gay is going to do. And even if we manage to keep Gay past next season, we don't have a proper backup at the position. It wouldn't hurt to have a solid veteran center to back up Cousins in the event of injury. Or perhaps a young center to groom. There's still a lot of work to be done with this team. And regardless of how talented Cousins is, he alone can't make us a winner. He needs solid help, not just throw aways from other teams. Finding a way to keep both Gay and IT would be a good start. Not likely though. Well see.

 

[Glenn]

I will be terribly surprised and disappointed if we don't make a large leap next year. This year was chaos but out of that chaos may have come some solutions.

 

[bajaden]

I completely agree. Major work has to be done this offseason.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I wasn't saying that's what you mean't, I was asking. You'll have to excuse me for responding to a post in this thread. I don't read every post in every thread, and even if I did, I can't remember who said what about what. You implied that the Suns should win the lottery because they weren't trying to tank, along with almost making it to the playoffs. Therefore its not much of a leap to think that the implication is that all the other teams in the lottery don't deserve to win because they were tanking. Which would include the Kings. Therefore the question.

Well, that's because, IMO, you're looking at it the wrong way: it's not a question of deserving versus undeserving. It's a question of deserving versus more deserving. The Phoenix Suns had every reason to tank. And, by all appearances, they were set up to do precisely that. What they decided to do instead was fight, and claw, and scratch, and try, and they fell just short of the playoffs. In my opinion, that sort of effort is more deserving of reward than a lesser effort, and it is certainly more deserving than a team that decided to put all its faith in ping-pong balls.

 

[theclash4u5]

The lakers, jazz and pistons are all winning tonight. Hopefully the pistons win then we have the 7th spot (unless we move up or down). If we would have lost against the wolves and tonight then we would have tied the lakers for 6th

 

[theclash4u5]

Sigh....damn Pistons

 

[hrdboild]

I don't think any GM can really know before a season starts that they've built a winner. If you already have a winner you can add to it but getting to that point? Sometimes it strikes over night. Right coach, right free agent acquisition, right veteran to mentor your lotto picks (KD raves about Kevin Ollie kick starting his career). Until that point you're buying seeds and giving them lots of water and hoping it happens. Phoenix made some good decisions but I wouldn't exactly say they expected to contend for a playoff spot. Milwaukee absolutely had the playoffs in mind and everything went wrong. Bottom line is that the best basketball players in the world are still human beings. Just because you think a certain combination of players will work out doesn't mean it will. And vice versa.

But while I don't think you can really know whether your decisions will work out or not until you try them, I recognize a difference maker when I see one. The biggest difference between last off-season and this one is that last year we thought we had a franchise center in the making and this season we know that we do. And that's a nice feeling. If we win a lotto spot, you take that as a gift and run with it. If not you can think about getting a rotation player that compliments Cousins in some way or think about trading up or package the pick for a vet. Either way, the bouncing of ping pong balls isn't going to be what makes our breaks us. The diligence of the front office in exploring all of their options is.

 

[ockingsfan]

If we would have lost against the wolves and tonight then we would have tied the lakers for 6th

If we would of loss to Twolves, Lakers would have lost tonight. Because we won, the Lakers played hard to win. Otherwise, the Lakers would of gone into tank city if that game mattered for the lottery.

 

[Gary]

I have been doing the draft lottery simulator on ESPN and it shows us taking Embiid if we get the 1st or 2nd picks.

Smart if we keep the 7th.

Seems about right. That's pretty much on par with what I would do.

 

[bajaden]

Well, that's because, IMO, you're looking at it the wrong way: it's not a question of deserving versus undeserving. It's a question of deserving versus more deserving. The Phoenix Suns had every reason to tank. And, by all appearances, they were set up to do precisely that. What they decided to do instead was fight, and claw, and scratch, and try, and they fell just short of the playoffs. In my opinion, that sort of effort is more deserving of reward than a lesser effort, and it is certainly more deserving than a team that decided to put all its faith in ping-pong balls.

Had you originally posted what you just posted here, I would have never asked the question!

 

[bajaden]

I have been doing the draft lottery simulator on ESPN and it shows us taking Embiid if we get the 1st or 2nd picks.

Smart if we keep the 7th.

Seems about right. That's pretty much on par with what I would do.

I like the Embiid part. Don't like the Smart part.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Had you originally posted what you just posted here, I would have never asked the question!

:: shrugs ::

It never really crossed my mind that I would have to explain myself.

 

[twslam07]

I like the Embiid part. Don't like the Smart part.

I know you are not the biggest fan of Smart, but at 7, who else would you take? This is my top 8 in terms of BPA:

1. Embiid
2. Wiggins
3. Parker
4. Randle
5. Exum
6. Vonleh
7. Smart
8. Harris (In case a team leapfrogs us)

Some of these player might not fit with our team very well, but I'll take the best player I can. I think Smart and Harris are close. I can see a case being made either way.

What is your top 7 or top 8? Is Smart not even on the list?

 

[HndsmCelt]

Well, that's because, IMO, you're looking at it the wrong way: it's not a question of deserving versus undeserving. It's a question of deserving versus more deserving. The Phoenix Suns had every reason to tank. And, by all appearances, they were set up to do precisely that. What they decided to do instead was fight, and claw, and scratch, and try, and they fell just short of the playoffs. In my opinion, that sort of effort is more deserving of reward than a lesser effort, and it is certainly more deserving than a team that decided to put all its faith in ping-pong balls.

I think you can blame Horneck for spoiling the front offices' plans

 

[bajaden]

:: shrugs ::

It never really crossed my mind that I would have to explain myself.

I can't even begin to tell you how many times something I wrote on this forum was misunderstood, and I had to explain my intentions when I wrote it.

 

[bajaden]

I know you are not the biggest fan of Smart, but at 7, who else would you take? This is my top 8 in terms of BPA:

1. Embiid
2. Wiggins
3. Parker
4. Randle
5. Exum
6. Vonleh
7. Smart
8. Harris (In case a team leapfrogs us)

Some of these player might not fit with our team very well, but I'll take the best player I can. I think Smart and Harris are close. I can see a case being made either way.

What is your top 7 or top 8? Is Smart not even on the list?

Since I pay little attention to how other people rank players, I have a different order. I would take Stauskas or Gordon over either Smart or Harris. Just because Draftexpress or any other draft board says a player should be drafted 14th or 15th, doesn't mean you have to take him there, or that you have to trade down to get him. If you like a player and you personally think he's the best player available, then you take him. Period! Otherwise you're letting other peoples opinions dictate who you should draft.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I know you are not the biggest fan of Smart, but at 7, who else would you take? This is my top 8 in terms of BPA:

Well, I won't presume to speak for bajaden, but if I were the GM, given that exact circumstance, I would try to trade the pick.

 

[twslam07]

Since I pay little attention to how other people rank players, I have a different order. I would take Stauskas or Gordon over either Smart or Harris. Just because Draftexpress or any other draft board says a player should be drafted 14th or 15th, doesn't mean you have to take him there, or that you have to trade down to get him. If you like a player and you personally think he's the best player available, then you take him. Period! Otherwise you're letting other peoples opinions dictate who you should draft.

Not sure if you meant to imply that my rankings are based off of what other people say, but that is not true.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Since I pay little attention to how other people rank players, I have a different order. I would take Stauskas or Gordon over either Smart or Harris. Just because Draftexpress or any other draft board says a player should be drafted 14th or 15th, doesn't mean you have to take him there, or that you have to trade down to get him. If you like a player and you personally think he's the best player available, then you take him. Period! Otherwise you're letting other peoples opinions dictate who you should draft.

Now, I've got to beg to differ with this: don't "waste" the seventh pick on a guy you think will still be available at fifteen. If nothing else, that seventh pick will probably be worth more to your prospective trade partner than it will to you. Why draft the fifteenth-best guy at seven, when you can draft the seventh-best guy at seven (even if you don't want him), and trade him to the team with the fifteenth pick for the seventh-best guy and somebody else/another pick?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Not sure if you meant to imply that my rankings are based off of what other people say, but that is not true.

Again, I won't presume to speak for bajaden, but it sounded to me like he was implying that he regards the player rankings of anyone not named bajaden about as high as I regard power rankings.

 

[Glenn]

I'm getting a headache.

 

[Gary]

Since I pay little attention to how other people rank players, I have a different order. I would take Stauskas or Gordon over either Smart or Harris. Just because Draftexpress or any other draft board says a player should be drafted 14th or 15th, doesn't mean you have to take him there, or that you have to trade down to get him. If you like a player and you personally think he's the best player available, then you take him. Period! Otherwise you're letting other peoples opinions dictate who you should draft.

They're usually where they are for a reason though whether it's potential/age/ability. Smart is going to be a good NBA player. Not sure how good of a PG he can be but he's going to be a 20ppg guy when all said and done. The "chance" that people are taking is if he could be a PG or not in the NBA. You also don't want to draft the 15th player at 7 but I assume you were just listing your prospects and not your actual draft position.

 

[bajaden]

Now, I've got to beg to differ with this: don't "waste" the seventh pick on a guy you think will still be available at fifteen. If nothing else, that seventh pick will probably be worth more to your prospective trade partner than it will to you. Why draft the fifteenth-best guy at seven, when you can draft the seventh-best guy at seven (even if you don't want him), and trade him to the team with the fifteenth pick for the seventh-best guy and somebody else/another pick?

Where your missing what I'm saying, is that I don't agree that he's the 15th best player just because someone else thinks so. I don't really know where Stauskas is currently ranked, but I have him ranked right after Vonleh and Gordon. Where ever that falls in the scheme of things. Now if I had him ranked 15th, and I was picking 7th, then no, I wouldn't pick him there. Actually, if I had to choose between Gordon and Stauskas, I'd have to think about it for a while. I'm sure there are many that would disagree with me.

 

[bajaden]

Not sure if you meant to imply that my rankings are based off of what other people say, but that is not true.

Didn't mean to imply anything in regards to you, but was speaking in general. Your list is pretty close to mine except for Smart and Harris. I like Harris, but Stauskas is a better shooter, passer, and has much better size for the position. Harris is currently a better defender, but I'm willing to gamble that Stauskas can become a good defender. I could throw Saric into the fray, but since I haven't seen him play, I'll just rely on others that have. I also like McDermott, but unlike Stauskas, I'm more reluctant to gamble on him becoming a good defender.

 

[bajaden]

Again, I won't presume to speak for bajaden, but it sounded to me like he was implying that he regards the player rankings of anyone not named bajaden about as high as I regard power rankings.

LOL! Well, if I didn't value my own opinion, then why would I waste my time watching hundreds of college games. Having said that, I'm far from perfect and have been wrong many times. If my opinion was easily affected by the opinions of others, or internet draft sites, then what value would it have? There are contributors to this forum whose opinions I respect and value. I don't always agree with them, and many times they were right and I was wrong. But I like to think that I've been right far more than I've been wrong. I also like to think that I've learned from my mistakes and I'm better at this now than I was 10 years ago.

The point of my original post as to ranking, is that any ranking is just someone's opinion, and it shouldn't discourage you, or anyone else from having an entirely different opinion. Every year I see people on this forum saying we shouldn't draft this player or that player because he's been ranked lower than were picking. Hell, I don't think Peja was even on a draft board when we chose him. That took guts on Petrie's part, but he was right. If the draft was held again today, Chandler Parsons would probably go in the top 12 somewhere, instead of the 2nd round. Anyway, the bottom line is, my opinion is just that, my opinion. No one has to read what I write or beleive what I right. Its worth what you paid for it.

 

[bajaden]

They're usually where they are for a reason though whether it's potential/age/ability. Smart is going to be a good NBA player. Not sure how good of a PG he can be but he's going to be a 20ppg guy when all said and done. The "chance" that people are taking is if he could be a PG or not in the NBA. You also don't want to draft the 15th player at 7 but I assume you were just listing your prospects and not your actual draft position.

I had to go see where draftexpress had Stauskas ranked. 14th! So to answer your question, I have Stauskas ranked 9th on my board. Now I don't rank players as to where I think they'll actually be drafted, but in the order I would have them if I were drafting. So on my board, if were drafting 7th, and I was to choose Stauskas, it would be that big a reach because first, at this point, the talent level is close to equal, and second, reaching from 7th to 9th isn't much of a reach.

Now I understand that others don't see it the same way, and that's the point I was trying to make. I understand that there are those that really like Smart, and therefore have him much higher on their board than I do. And that's fine. I just don't agree. I hope for his sake I'm wrong.

Edit: Well I went an opened my mouth without looking where I had Stauskas ranked. Turns out, I have him 8th. Here's my list of the top 15 as I would pick them. You can enjoy yourself picking it apart.

1. Joel Embiid: Depends on getting a clean bill health. Could be superstar.
2. Jabari Parker: Highly skilled player. NBA ready. Hard to guard one on one.
3. Andrew Wiggins: Most long range potential in draft. Can guard three positions.
4. Dante Exum: Super athlete that can play PG or SG both offensively and defensively.
5. Julius Randle: I have him ranked ahead of Vonleh because he's more ready to play.
6. Noah Vonleh: Loaded with tools, just needs time and experience.
7. Aaron Gordon: Only if he comes in at least 6'8" in shoes. Freak athlete.
8. Nik Stauskas: How can you not love a player whose first name is Nik. Great shooter.
9. Gary Harris: Hopefully he's at least 6'4" in shoes. Good defender.
10. Dario Saric: Don't know much about him, so trusting others.
11. Marcus Smart: Shoots too much, and he can't shoot. Great defender.
12. Tyler Ennis: Great PG instincts but outside shot needs work. Average athlete.
13. Kyle Anderson: Had him in 2nd round, but he convinced me he can play in NBA.
14. James Young: Going to be a solid swing man in NBA. Good, but not great athlete.
15. Rodney Hood: Could be eventual starter, but solid guy off bench at minimum.

 

[macadocious]

Thoughts on Kyle Anderson? I have seen him as high as 4th overall and as low as 25th. Quite the range.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Thoughts on Kyle Anderson? I have seen him as high as 4th overall and as low as 25th. Quite the range.

Ask and ye shall receive. DX just put up a detailed report on him today. (link)

 

[funkykingston]

Well, I won't presume to speak for bajaden, but if I were the GM, given that exact circumstance, I would try to trade the pick.

I'd certainly consider it. If Chicago offered the 16th and 19th picks for our 7th pick and the guys I had as top rated (Embiid, Wiggins, Exum, Parker, Vonleh) are all off the board I'd probably make that deal and use the picks to fill in some role player holes and/or gamble on some higher risk/higher reward players. Guys like Capela, LaVine etc.

 

[LPKingsFan]

I'd certainly consider it. If Chicago offered the 16th and 19th picks for our 7th pick and the guys I had as top rated (Embiid, Wiggins, Exum, Parker, Vonleh) are all off the board I'd probably make that deal and use the picks to fill in some role player holes and/or gamble on some higher risk/higher reward players. Guys like Capela, LaVine etc.

Or better yet, maybe one of those picks and Snell.