We're #8...
- Thread starter parker
- Start date
Well, let's look at the bright side.
Picking at #8 there is less pressure to make a home run pick and gamble on a player.
At #8, we can take the BPA for our needs and not try to project a player out 3-4 years from now.
I think the kings will pick BPA and a player that can contribute sooner rather than later. The kings are trying to make the playoffs next year, so no projects please.
Picking at #8 there is less pressure to make a home run pick and gamble on a player.
At #8, we can take the BPA for our needs and not try to project a player out 3-4 years from now.
I think the kings will pick BPA and a player that can contribute sooner rather than later. The kings are trying to make the playoffs next year, so no projects please.
or you can fill the roster spot wit a Ben McLemore, Nik Stauskas, or Jimmer.
In any case, the Kings future is now. If its a kid, its got to be somebody ready to be a rotation player in the NBA. The real NBA, not the we give you pity minutes because the season is lost and you need to learn how to bounce a ball NBA.
You don't trade a #8 pick straight for a vet anyway. You trade the #8 pick and a vet together to get back a better vet. While Acy and Curry on the fringes are question marks, and Rondo a main rotation guy, we've actually got nearly enough bodies under contract. We just need to upgrade.
In any case, the Kings future is now. If its a kid, its got to be somebody ready to be a rotation player in the NBA. The real NBA, not the we give you pity minutes because the season is lost and you need to learn how to bounce a ball NBA.
You don't trade a #8 pick straight for a vet anyway. You trade the #8 pick and a vet together to get back a better vet. While Acy and Curry on the fringes are question marks, and Rondo a main rotation guy, we've actually got nearly enough bodies under contract. We just need to upgrade.
The '89 draft wasn't so bad. It's just that the number 1 pick (by the Kings, no less) was used on a guy that didn't have much of an impact in the league. I think Jerry R. has indicated that Pervis was Bill Russell's guy. But aside from the disappointing first overall pick, that draft netted Tim Hardaway, Shawn Kemp, Glen Rice, and many others, even including our own Vlade!
At the minute I'd say my favored picks for us would be Kris Dunn (pg) or Buddy Hield (SG), either player would be a good addition.
If both are available it would be a more difficult choice. I could see us wanting to get an upgrade or solution at SG, which could see us draft Hield regardless of what happens with Rondo. But equally I could see us go for Dunn to be our new starting point guard and giving us the ability to let Rondo walk and use our cap space on strengthening the other positions (for example, signing Courtney Lee or Batum for SG). I think I'd lean towards Dunn if both are available, but Hield would be a good choice as well.
If both are available it would be a more difficult choice. I could see us wanting to get an upgrade or solution at SG, which could see us draft Hield regardless of what happens with Rondo. But equally I could see us go for Dunn to be our new starting point guard and giving us the ability to let Rondo walk and use our cap space on strengthening the other positions (for example, signing Courtney Lee or Batum for SG). I think I'd lean towards Dunn if both are available, but Hield would be a good choice as well.
I don't want Rondo back because the price tag may be too high and he doesn't play defense. For all I know Collison is better right now. He certainly is better bang for the buck. In any case having both on the team at the same time doesn't work very well.
We can't let Curry go. He certainly is NBA quality. His cveiling is unknown but I was impressed with him last year. To finish off our PG position. get Dunn (yeah, sure
). Right off the bat he plays defense and has a big body. We unfortunately don't have control over whether he is available or not and it is unlikely he will be available. If we got him, that gives us some versitality even if he isn't a super star. That gives us three PGs that don't break the bank and there is some versitality in that Dunn can play SG as can Curry or Collison depending very much on matchups. The defense might actually be good from this threesome.
The money we save by letting Rondo go may be used on FAs. I am thinking mainly of Ryan Anderson because he actually has stated a desire to play near his family. He is a Sacramento area guy. None of these ideas are anything knew from me.
We can't let Curry go. He certainly is NBA quality. His cveiling is unknown but I was impressed with him last year. To finish off our PG position. get Dunn (yeah, sure
). Right off the bat he plays defense and has a big body. We unfortunately don't have control over whether he is available or not and it is unlikely he will be available. If we got him, that gives us some versitality even if he isn't a super star. That gives us three PGs that don't break the bank and there is some versitality in that Dunn can play SG as can Curry or Collison depending very much on matchups. The defense might actually be good from this threesome.The money we save by letting Rondo go may be used on FAs. I am thinking mainly of Ryan Anderson because he actually has stated a desire to play near his family. He is a Sacramento area guy. None of these ideas are anything knew from me.
It was about getting extra trade currency which is very helpful when we are trying to retool on the fly. If there is a prospect who fits the need, can perform straight away and develop into an all-star then sure, let's keep the pick. I would personally love Dunn.
Just because teams don't want a player it doesn't make them a bad player. It is about the fit and where the team is up to at a particular point. Rudy Gay is a classic example for us, then there was Baron Davis from Charlotte to Golden State etc..
But you are absolutely correct in saying pick packaged with someone else might get us what we want. For example Rudy and pick 8 is a pretty nice package to go shopping with if we choose to do so.
Just because teams don't want a player it doesn't make them a bad player. It is about the fit and where the team is up to at a particular point. Rudy Gay is a classic example for us, then there was Baron Davis from Charlotte to Golden State etc..
But you are absolutely correct in saying pick packaged with someone else might get us what we want. For example Rudy and pick 8 is a pretty nice package to go shopping with if we choose to do so.
If we trade Gay and the pick at 8, we better be getting an all-star back. I don't think this franchise is in position to trade multiple assets to fill the SG position with just a 3 and D guy.
If we make that deal:
We create a hole at SF. Love Casspi but he's a nice backup and he would be the starter....not good
We lose out on a cost controlled young player with the pick.....I trust Vlade would pick a strong rookie who can contribute on the defensive end
I think there is a chance that we see Hield or Brown drop to 8 or there is an opportunity to draft a Valentine or other similar type. I'd like to see what Joerger thinks of Gay.
If we make that deal:
We create a hole at SF. Love Casspi but he's a nice backup and he would be the starter....not good
We lose out on a cost controlled young player with the pick.....I trust Vlade would pick a strong rookie who can contribute on the defensive end
I think there is a chance that we see Hield or Brown drop to 8 or there is an opportunity to draft a Valentine or other similar type. I'd like to see what Joerger thinks of Gay.
I'm having a hard time finding who the successful teams are right now who have been trading their lottery picks to become successful. GSW, San Antonio, OKC build through the draft. Minnesota, Milwaukee, Boston, Cleveland.
When you're knocking on the door to make a title run, then you might look at that. But in that scenario, you also now have free agents looking to come to you.
We can point at Robinson, Jimmer, Nik and say that this is why the draft is bad. But those were blatant drafting errors. It wasn't the process, it was the franchise. It's time to start doing things right and stop acting out of desperation. With a free agent pickup here and there, we're already a playoff roster.
When you're knocking on the door to make a title run, then you might look at that. But in that scenario, you also now have free agents looking to come to you.
We can point at Robinson, Jimmer, Nik and say that this is why the draft is bad. But those were blatant drafting errors. It wasn't the process, it was the franchise. It's time to start doing things right and stop acting out of desperation. With a free agent pickup here and there, we're already a playoff roster.
Well maybe I'm the one off base then. For me the future is now for teams like the cavs, warriors, thunder, etc. The future is most definitely NOT now for us... In all likelihood the brightest the near future holds for us is a first round exit. We need to draft shrewdly (I.e. hit a homerun once or twice) to brighten that outlook anytime soon imo.
Or you can change coaches and get Westphal, Smart, Natt, or Karl. Or you can rely on free agency and get Carl Landry and Mikki Moore. Maybe we should just throw up our hands and go home?
Bad front offices make bad decisions. But Vlade is 1/1 on the draft so far. That's a better record than his work in any other respect.
Bad front offices make bad decisions. But Vlade is 1/1 on the draft so far. That's a better record than his work in any other respect.
Which is why good teams don't run around changing their coaches every year. You get a good one, you hang on for dear life.
The draft is by FAR the most erratic way to add pieces if you're looking for a sure way forward. The difference between the draft or free agency/trades is that half the people in the draft pool aren't even NBA players in the end. Half of the half remaining will never be more than bit players you can pick up on any NBA free agent corner come August.
You miss in free agency, you still get a rotation player. You miss in the draft, you get nothing. A guy who actively hurts you until you bench him. Heck, half the time you hit in the draft, you STILL get nothing in that first year, as kids come in so young that they are still figuring out how to shave, let alone actually help a winning team.
One year from now we could have either a) likely lost Cuz, b) Vlade in hot water; c) the hit pieces on Joerger's failure and him starting to get that Memphis feel; d) poisonous fanbase even more poisonous; e) lost momentum from our new building, and ticket renewals suppressed int he face of a new rebuild leaving us years from playoffs.
OR we can just do what it takes to make it into the playoffs, and everything resets for a bit. The monkey is off the back, the pressure broken, hope, whether legitimate or not, in the air.
There is only one choice. And some numbnuts kid is completely irrelevant to what we need to accomplish. He can go screw himself. IF there is a 21yr old 7'1" gazelle ready for helpful rotation minutes next year? Hey, grab him. But you sit on NOTHING. You wait on NOTHING. I've said this before, but waiting for a 19yr old raw kid to maybe/hopefully/pretty please blossom and going yay! about it 3yrs down the road while in he interim he cost you your franchise player, and possibly your GM and coach too, is ridiculous. Making the playoffs THIS year is as important to us as a franchise as making the ECF was for the Raptors. FINALLY, they break through. Finally there is progress and hope. Changes everything.
Free agent acquisition Marco Bellinelli actively hurt the team this past season.
Look, I'm not opposed to moving the pick if the right deal presents itself. But I certainly don't think we should do it out of principle, or based on past results.
You of all people should know that past results do not guarantee future performance
Look, I'm not opposed to moving the pick if the right deal presents itself. But I certainly don't think we should do it out of principle, or based on past results.
You of all people should know that past results do not guarantee future performance
Exactly. We're trying to bring in players to create the environment. That's backwards and hurts the player and team. Create a solid foundation from the top down and the players will respond positively. Players reflect their leadership. They may have individual talent, but rarely reach their potential under bad management.
I think the players DID create that environment. Or at least its precursors. And think that's one of the things that opened up the door to picking up a winning/win now coach.
You have to start somewhere. We vetted up, received some benefits from it, just had the wrong coach. Now we fixed the coach too. Despite the idiot local media reports, the lockerroom itself, aside from barring the door to the coach, actually held together pretty well. Now we have some vets in the lockerroom, we have a coach used to coaching vets, just a few right moves and there's nothing holding us back. With a bunch of kids and guys who don't know how to win there is always an x-factor holding you back. Eliminate all x-factors, and the end result should be a given.
You have to start somewhere. We vetted up, received some benefits from it, just had the wrong coach. Now we fixed the coach too. Despite the idiot local media reports, the lockerroom itself, aside from barring the door to the coach, actually held together pretty well. Now we have some vets in the lockerroom, we have a coach used to coaching vets, just a few right moves and there's nothing holding us back. With a bunch of kids and guys who don't know how to win there is always an x-factor holding you back. Eliminate all x-factors, and the end result should be a given.