2014 Draft Prospects:

KJ McDaniels is one of my fav players in this draft. Something about him screams NBA caliber player. He had to take a lot of shots on one of the worst offensive teams in the NCAA last season. Imagine if he finds a team that will use him as a 3&D player. He's not a bad 3pt shooter when he's set. His rebounding and shot blocking from the wing are outstanding.

Saric has grown on me - lots of talent there and could be a steal at #8. Needs a coach to use him correctly, of course. Not sure if Malone is the guy for Saric would be my biggest concern.
 
I'm always looking for potential 3&D players. Guys that have the skills and the mindset to excel in that role are valuable because every good team needs a couple. Especially teams anchored by a scoring big man like Cousins. I wanted Jeff Taylor two years ago and I liked Reggie Bullock last year. Then I was hoping the Kings would sign Dorrell Wright last offseason. I think McDaniels can definitely play that role but I also think he has more potential than any of them.

I also like Dinwiddle as a 3&D SG and I think he'd be a steal in the 2nd round.

Of course, the time to aggressively go after 3&D guys, glue guys, situational rebounders etc. is once the core of your team is set. I don't think IT/Cousins, Gay/Cousins or even IT/Gay/Cousins is a solid core.

We'll see.
 
One thing on Gordon .. the dude grew over an inch is less than a year. Very possible he'll keep growing another 1/2 inch or more. He's the youngest player in the draft.

EDIT: 39 inch vert for Gordon.
That is what I was thinking too. He is 6'8 3/4" with shoes on. Still only 18 years old. He could very well reach 6'9 1/2" or 6'10" with shoes on by his 2nd year.

I think that is what happened with Blake Griffin, because he sure didn't look 6'10" in his freshman year at Oklahoma.

I'm starting to warm up to Aaron Gordon at #8 for the Kings.
 
I like Gordon a lot as a player but I'm not sure he has a position in the NBA. You're betting on him growing more (could happen) or getting stronger and learning to finish through contact (could happen) or developing some kind of serviceable jumpshot (could happen). I wouldn't be upset if he's the pick but people should understand that he's going to be as raw as McLemore was as a rookie. You really have to be patient, but the long-term payoff could be worth it.
 
I wouldn't want Peyton at #8. But if the Kings traded down for two first rounders or a later first and a veteran role player then I'd certainly be on board with drafting him.

Not only does Peyton have a busted shot, but he doesn't finish at the rim well either. I don't think he'll be Rubio level bad as far as scoring but he's definitely going to have to make his mark as a defender and playmaker.

I think Smart could be a dominant defender at the PG spot. His shot concerns me but my bigger concern is whether he can actually run a team.

.
Rondo has proved if you have elite quickness you can get buy with a bad shot. And finishing will get easier for him here because of his pg skills teams will be afraid to leave DMC cause he will make the pass. I just love a guy that scouts and coaches say has great defensive demeanor that they compare to the Glove Gary Payton.
 
Rondo has proved if you have elite quickness you can get buy with a bad shot. And finishing will get easier for him here because of his pg skills teams will be afraid to leave DMC cause he will make the pass. I just love a guy that scouts and coaches say has great defensive demeanor that they compare to the Glove Gary Payton.
My question with Peyton is his mentality. Rondo always had that edge to him. Gary Payton definitely had an edge to him. Elfrid Peyton seems more laid back. It probably makes him a more pleasant person to be around but a less effective player.

Quite honestly I think that was the only thing that stood between Tyreke and becoming a star in the NBA. I think he loves basketball but I don't think he has the drive to harness all of his potential.

And to be clear, I'm not saying you have to be a jerk to be a great player. Kevin Durant seems like the most genuine and grounded NBA superstar I've ever seen but he absolutely has the drive to be great. And Tim Duncan's demeanor belies his will to win and to dominate.

But the fact remains that, like most things in life, at a certain level there isn't a lot that differentiates the average and the good and the good and the great than mentality and work ethic. I'm not sure Smart can be a playmaker or even a real PG and I have real concerns about his shot and especially shot selection but I'd be really surprised if he busts simply because I don't question his effort or desire.

So while there's a lot I really like about Peyton, my biggest question has to do with his desire and you can't really get that from game tape.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
It's not Smart's shot that needs work so much as his shot selection. There are some form issues he should work on with his follow through and I don't think he has NBA range yet, but the main problem I see with him is where he's taking his shots and when he's taking them. Pulling up off the dribble in traffic tends to result in rushing shots up with odd body contortions. Some players can make this work but Smart doesn't appear to be one of them (yet). I'd be less concerned about Smart's shooting issues if he seemed less inclined to throw bad shots at the basket. The comparison to me is more about style of play. Payton has more work to do on his shot than Smart does, but he already displays much better self-control. I feel like the kind of shots Payton wants to take -- spotted up for three or 10-15 feet from the basket with the defense out of position -- will be easier for him to get locked in than the acrobatic looks Smart seems to prefer, if that makes sense.
To expand on your thoughts. Playing PG is about making good decisions. I think we can all agree on that. So the question is, is a player consistently makes bad decisions in one area, how much confidence do you have that he'll make good decisions in another? Example: Smart averaged 12.5 shot attempts per game last season. Out of those 12.5 attempts, 5.3 of them were three point attempts, despite the fact that he was only shooting 29.9% from there. In other words, of all his shots, 42.4% were three pointers. Now he was pretty efficient at getting to the basket and scoring, and if he had done more of that, than shoot from the outside, he would have shot better than the inefficient 42.2% overall. His assist totals were good, but not great. He also averaged 2.9 steals.

Payton on the other hand averaged 13.3 shots per game, and while his three point percentage was a pitiful 25.9%, he only took 1.5 three point shots per game, or 11.2% of his shots were three pointers. So obviously, he was smart enough to figure out, that if you can't shoot well from the three, then don't shoot from there. As a result he shot a very effecient 50.9% overall. His assist totals were a bit higher than Smarts at 5.9 a game, and he averaged 2.3 steals a game. One has to wonder that if their roles were reversed, how each of them would fare in the coming draft. Not many people saw Payton play, including me. They simply weren't on televison that often. If not for the Fox sports channel, I probably wouldn't have seen him at all.

Obviously I'm biased when it comes to Smart. To me, there's more to not like than like. But that's just my opinion. But if a player isn't smart enough to figure out that he's hurting the team by chucking away from behind the three point line, then I question his overall on court intelligence. To be fair to Smart, I've seen him play a lot, and the more you watch a player play, the more glaring the strengths and weaknesses become. Perhaps if I had seen Payton play as many games, I'd have a less favorable opinion as well. Or, maybe I'd like him even more.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
My question with Peyton is his mentality. Rondo always had that edge to him. Gary Payton definitely had an edge to him. Elfrid Peyton seems more laid back. It probably makes him a more pleasant person to be around but a less effective player.

Quite honestly I think that was the only thing that stood between Tyreke and becoming a star in the NBA. I think he loves basketball but I don't think he has the drive to harness all of his potential.

And to be clear, I'm not saying you have to be a jerk to be a great player. Kevin Durant seems like the most genuine and grounded NBA superstar I've ever seen but he absolutely has the drive to be great. And Tim Duncan's demeanor belies his will to win and to dominate.

But the fact remains that, like most things in life, at a certain level there isn't a lot that differentiates the average and the good and the good and the great than mentality and work ethic. I'm not sure Smart can be a playmaker or even a real PG and I have real concerns about his shot and especially shot selection but I'd be really surprised if he busts simply because I don't question his effort or desire.

So while there's a lot I really like about Peyton, my biggest question has to do with his desire and you can't really get that from game tape.
I think it's fair to point out that many people said the same thing about Lillard coming out of college. I admit that I didn't get to watch Payton play as many times as I would have wanted, but he didn't appear to play with a laid back demeanor. He was always attacking the basket, and the dude has great handles. Anyway, just my thoughts.
 
Anyone else like KJ McDaniels? Looks like he could be a Jimmy Butler type player, he may have even more upside. No real way for us to get him as things stand given that he'll likely be a mid-late first rounder, but he's someone I like.
 
Anyone else like KJ McDaniels? Looks like he could be a Jimmy Butler type player, he may have even more upside. No real way for us to get him as things stand given that he'll likely be a mid-late first rounder, but he's someone I like.
Agreed. I hope they bring him in because he seems like the type of player the FO should like, and there's always a chance they end up with a mid-first by trading down or trading for another pick.
 
I'm always back and fourth between Gordon and Vonleh (though neither are at the top of my list). I have Vonleh ahead of Gordon at this point. Bigger, has a true position. His handle looks much better than I'd anticipated there. He's clearly not as explosive as his combine measurements suggest, but still a good athlete, especially in terms of agility/running the floor. With his size and skill set I think he's going to climb up the board. He may go top 5, with an outside chance of going even higher. Don't think he'll be there at 8 but I'd take him over Gordon if it was a straight choice.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
I'm always back and fourth between Gordon and Vonleh (though neither are at the top of my list). I have Vonleh ahead of Gordon at this point. Bigger, has a true position. His handle looks much better than I'd anticipated there. He's clearly not as explosive as his combine measurements suggest, but still a good athlete, especially in terms of agility/running the floor. With his size and skill set I think he's going to climb up the board. He may go top 5, with an outside chance of going even higher. Don't think he'll be there at 8 but I'd take him over Gordon if it was a straight choice.
I believe I said that I'd take Vonleh over Randle, simply because of his upside. I've liked Vonleh for quite a while, and I agree that he won't be there at 8. However, its possible that the Kings could move up. Utah is sitting there at 5, and with Favors at the PF position, its possible that they would be willing to move down to 8 if we included JT in the deal. JT would be a solid backup behind Favors, and he can fill in at center if needed. Apparently Payton impressed with his work against Smart. Not a surprise. I like Payton, and he's more of a PG than Smart is at this point in time. Of course neither can shoot the rock, but both are good defenders.

Gordon is interesting. He struggled with his shot all season, but his upside is terrific. With his current skill set, he'll have to play PF, but my gut tells me he can. Hell, he's one of the youngest players in the draft, so maybe he'll grow another inch. JT grew 5 inches between freshman and senior years. If we stay at 8, I think were looking at a group of Gordon, McDermott, Stauskas, and Payton. I suspose you could slide some international players into that group as well. I have no doubt that we'll get a good player. With luck, maybe a great player.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
yeah another wasted season at kings land. not sure what we really accomplished this year halfway sucking.
Well, we kept the team in sacramento. We have a new owner, a new GM and a new coach. The majority of the players from the Maloof era are gone. We went from last in the league in defense, to I believe 24th. As Bill Murry said, tiny steps, tiny steps. Cousins took another step up the ladder on his way to becoming an all star. The year turned out pretty much like I thought it would. I did think we would win a few more games, but I figured we would be in the lottery. So while I'm not happy, I'm not particularly disappointed either. But I know your referring to the draft, and that we won just enough games to be out of the running for one of the top players. On that count, it is a disappointment. But lets wait and see how it plays out. There may be a surprise.....
 
I recorded a few Michigan game and didn't get a chance to watch them until recently, and I just want to say: that Nik Stauskas dude is way better than I had expected. He is not just a shooter and he is not the slow footed Jimmer-esque that I thought he would be based on the scouting report. The guy can create his own shot, he can handle the ball, he has a good mid range game and he works the screens like a pro. The thing is, 90% of his moves are translatable to the pros, he has a true position and he is taller than most of his peers. In the right system this kid can explode - it's going to be hard to guard a guy who can knock it down from deep if you go underneath the screen but has the ball handling and speed to get to the mid-range and knock that down if you go on top of the screen. I don't think he is an All-Star but I think there is a good chance he reaches the Klay Thompson level. To me, he is a better prospect than Smart, Vonleh, Gordon and McDorment.
 
I'm going to take that with a pinch of salt as I don't believe it makes much sense.
What part don't you believe? The Stauskas part is certainly believable. Even more so if perhaps the Kings have a deal in place that might include McLemore. Stauskas is the real deal. At least offensively. The jury is still out defensively, but he's a good enough athlete to at minimum, be decent on defense, and perhaps more than decent. None of this means the Kings will draft Stauskas, but if they do, I wouldn't be disappointed nor surprised.
 
What part don't you believe? The Stauskas part is certainly believable. Even more so if perhaps the Kings have a deal in place that might include McLemore. Stauskas is the real deal. At least offensively. The jury is still out defensively, but he's a good enough athlete to at minimum, be decent on defense, and perhaps more than decent. None of this means the Kings will draft Stauskas, but if they do, I wouldn't be disappointed nor surprised.
I agree with everything you say. Emphasis for me though, is on the IF we are willing to trade McLemore. I have nothing against Stauskas, I actually like him as a prospect. Not crazy on him, but I like him. He's a true shooter who has legit skills, and deceptive athleticism, offensively. The reason I find it hard to believe it is simply because of Ben. Everything I read/hear is that the FO loves Ben. I can't imagine they give up on him this early. That's my reservation about the info. As for Stauskas, don't dislike him as a prospect. Don't LOVE him, but can see what he has to offer. Personally I'd rather we get someone who is a proven defensive player, but who knows. Would like him but only makes sense, IMO of course, if we move Ben. That's all. Nothing against Nik Per Se. As it is, I think Randle is going to drop to us. Not the best fit, but God damn, take him at 8 and go home happy. He's not T-Rob. This is a hugely talented physical beast who is highly skilled offensively.
Not my first choice, but if Embiid/Parker/Wiggins/Exum/Smart/Vonleh/Gordon go top 7, I think you have to take Randle. He's being seriously under-rated here.
 
Has anybody here seen Kristaps Porzingis play?
On paper he looks like a great fit next to Cousins, he's tall (7'0), mobile, can block shots, has three point range. He's also extremely young and needs to put on a lot of weight before he can even hope to effectively guard one on one back to the basket power forwards. The Kings need immediate help so I won't be extatic if the front office reaches for him with the eigth pick, but he's one of the most intriguing prospects in the middle of the first round.

My two cents on Randle: yes, he is underrated. I watched all his tournament games and I'm convinced that he's at least a top 4 talent in this draft. Anyway the Kings are not the right environment for him, he needs shots and a capable defensive center. Provided that he translates with no problems to the pros, in Sac he would be able to express maybe 1/3 of what he's capable of doing.
 
I agree with everything you say. Emphasis for me though, is on the IF we are willing to trade McLemore. I have nothing against Stauskas, I actually like him as a prospect. Not crazy on him, but I like him. He's a true shooter who has legit skills, and deceptive athleticism, offensively. The reason I find it hard to believe it is simply because of Ben. Everything I read/hear is that the FO loves Ben. I can't imagine they give up on him this early. That's my reservation about the info. As for Stauskas, don't dislike him as a prospect. Don't LOVE him, but can see what he has to offer. Personally I'd rather we get someone who is a proven defensive player, but who knows. Would like him but only makes sense, IMO of course, if we move Ben. That's all. Nothing against Nik Per Se. As it is, I think Randle is going to drop to us. Not the best fit, but God damn, take him at 8 and go home happy. He's not T-Rob. This is a hugely talented physical beast who is highly skilled offensively.
Not my first choice, but if Embiid/Parker/Wiggins/Exum/Smart/Vonleh/Gordon go top 7, I think you have to take Randle. He's being seriously under-rated here.
On Randle we certainly agree. I think Randle is going to be a better pro than he was a college player. For starters, he's better than any PF we currently have on the team, the moment he sets foot on the floor. I think he's going to be a better defender than people realize. He'll never be a prolific shotblocker, but then, there aren't that many in the league to begin with, so I'm not going to turn down a good player simply because he doesn't fit the perfect image of what I want. The same applies to Stauskas. Too many people get so obsessed with defense, that they turn their backs on very good basketball players. I don't disagree that our defense has to improve, but I'm a huge believer in team defense, and I think Stauskas is savy enough and athletic enough to be a part of a good team defensive team.

The Spurs are on the brink of winning the championship. Tell me who on that team is an all world defender. Perhaps Leonad! Duncan was at one time, but he's not the player he used to be. The play outstanding team defense, and they just keep plugging in new players. Granted, they try and pick two way players in the draft like Leonard, but they also pick players with other special talents, and blend them into the team concept. Not saying its easy, but its much easier than waiting until you can put together a team made up of Wade, Lebron, and Bosh. I realize that we still have McLemore, and I'm still very high on him. But sometimes you have to give up someone your high on as part of a deal in order to acquire a superior player. Of course I'm referring to Love, but he's just an example at the moment. Plus, lets remember that the only SG we have on the roster right now is McLemore. Personally, I think in a head to head battle, Stauskas would win. But who knows, McLemore may be the better player in 3 or 4 years. Point is, we need consistent outside shooting, and Stauskas can give us that, and much more. He can actually play a little PG if needed, and he can play a little SF if needed. So even if we kept starting McLemore, I can easily see Stauskas getting 24 to 28 minutes a game just backing up three positions.

Hey, its all good and it should be fun to see how it plays out. Not to bore you, but I was listening to an NBA scout, whose name excapes me, it wasn't Ryan Blake, but he was talking about how at the combine they should measure shoulder height as well as overall height. He said some players have longer necks or bigger and longer heads, which makes them taller, but when standing next to a shorter player, their shoulders are lower, which mean they can have a shorter standing reach if the wingspans are similar. Bottom line is, a players standing reach is the true indicator of his true height as far as basketball is concerned. Elton Brand springs to mind. Dude is around 6'8 or so, but he has no neck and a small head, but has something like a 7'4"wingspan. So to call him undersized is a misnomer.
 
Has anybody here seen Kristaps Porzingis play?
On paper he looks like a great fit next to Cousins, he's tall (7'0), mobile, can block shots, has three point range. He's also extremely young and needs to put on a lot of weight before he can even hope to effectively guard one on one back to the basket power forwards. The Kings need immediate help so I won't be extatic if the front office reaches for him with the eigth pick, but he's one of the most intriguing prospects in the middle of the first round.

My two cents on Randle: yes, he is underrated. I watched all his tournament games and I'm convinced that he's at least a top 4 talent in this draft. Anyway the Kings are not the right environment for him, he needs shots and a capable defensive center. Provided that he translates with no problems to the pros, in Sac he would be able to express maybe 1/3 of what he's capable of doing.
I agree on Randle, and you could be right about the fit. But that depends on the Kings coaching staff. If they want to continue playing isolation basketball, and we retain Gay and IT, then your right, Randle's talent could be wasted. But if Malone inforces a team concept and we start playing unselfish ball with more passing, then he could be a great addition. Very few teams would out-rebound us. Don't you think its strange that we fans, look at a player and think, what a great talent, too bad he doesn't fit. That's our mentality, and it needs to change. A good coach finds a way to conform to the talent he has, not the other way around. He develops offensive and defensive schemes that allows the players to best utilize their god given talents, while playing within a team concept. That's what separates the men from the boys when it comes to coaching. I don't know if Malone is the right guy just yet. Way too early to tell, especially with all the personnel changes that were going last season.
 
Has anybody here seen Kristaps Porzingis play?
On paper he looks like a great fit next to Cousins, he's tall (7'0), mobile, can block shots, has three point range. He's also extremely young and needs to put on a lot of weight before he can even hope to effectively guard one on one back to the basket power forwards. The Kings need immediate help so I won't be extatic if the front office reaches for him with the eigth pick, but he's one of the most intriguing prospects in the middle of the first round.

My two cents on Randle: yes, he is underrated. I watched all his tournament games and I'm convinced that he's at least a top 4 talent in this draft. Anyway the Kings are not the right environment for him, he needs shots and a capable defensive center. Provided that he translates with no problems to the pros, in Sac he would be able to express maybe 1/3 of what he's capable of doing.
I believe Porzingis just opted out of the draft