Who do we draft?

[funkykingston]

I was incredibly encouraged by Hield's numbers down the stretch. His 3P% with Sacramento would have put him 6th in the NBA just behind JJ Redick and ahead of Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, CJ McCollum, Bradley Beal etc.

Can he do that for a season? After all, he only shot 37% in New Orleans (and 39% overall vs 48% with the Kings) so there's reason to think it was a bit of a fluke.

But I think the way he was used by Joerger was different (and much better) and he was allowed to play his game so there's good reason to hope it wasn't.

At the very least I think Hield has shown enough to warrant a starting gig next season. And I think he's going to be an NBA starter for years. A star? That's a stretch at the moment, but he did show some flashes.

 

[CelticsFan]

At the very least I think Hield has shown enough to warrant a starting gig next season. And I think he's going to be an NBA starter for years. A star? That's a stretch at the moment, but he did show some flashes.

Yes I think Heild has shown it's his spot to lose next season but I wouldn't be floored if Bogdan, Richardson or a possible draft pick overtakes him. I could see Heild as a player who provides a scoring punch off the bench.

Just my opinion but I'm not ready to lock anyone into this team as a starter for years to come.

 

[Chupacabra]

That's my first thought as well.

Richardson makes a lot of sense. If Bogdanovic comes over the Kings will have four SGs - Temple, Hield, Richardson and Bogdanovic. Temple is signed for two more seasons, is an ideal veteran for a young team and is worth more on the Kings than the little he'd return in trade. Bogdanovic seems like a key piece for Vlade and Hield has looked at the very least like a very solid starting SG who can put up points.

But I don't think Richardson is enough to move up in this draft.

I don't like the idea of trading Hield but I also don't like the idea of three young SGs who all need minutes, especially when (depending on Bogdanovic's deal) they are likely to hit free agency at the same time.

That's part of the issue with the Kings having four rookies last year. Hield, Richardson, Labissiere and Papagiannis are all going to hit free agency at the same time. That's not a good thing and part of the issue with stocking up with too many rookies at once. It's great while they are on their rookie deals and it makes them very good trade pieces, but if you hold on to them then down the road it hurts when it's time to pay the piper. Either you bleed talent when they walk for nothing or you have to overpay to keep a lot of guys at once.

The question isn't whether or not we want to trade Buddy Hield. I don't think anyone wants to. The question is whether the dropoff from Hield to Malachi or Bogdan is bigger than the gain the team would get in moving from 10 to 7 to get the rookie they want.

Fox vs Markkanen? Smith Jr. vs Jarrett Allen? Isaac vs Collins?

Vlade has hard decisions to make if he wants to actually build a winning team.

You're thinking long term and I like it. This is exactly why its important to take BPA. I just think that the reasoning for not selecting DSJ is entirely too flimsy to use if he is still available at our pick. The guy is going to be a hell of a player.

 

[Kingsfan23]

Agreed. Some people have far too lofty expectations for Buddy going by what he's shown so far. I've seen people compare him to Harden (lite) which is crazy, he doesn't display even close to the same amount of skills as Harden. Buddy is also a pretty old rookie so his upside is going to be limited. He's shown he can score and shoot so far, and has shown promise, but I'd be hesitant to claim he'll be one of the league's best SGs based on what we've seen. I'll happily eat my words if he does indeed break out in the next few years.

No, you haven't seen anyone compare him to Harden. Harden is a top 5 player. "Lite" just means he may be able to create as a ball dominant playmaker in time, no matter if he's only a top 6-7 SG, which I think is in reason

 

[Kingsfan23]

Yes I think Heild has shown it's his spot to lose next season but I wouldn't be floored if Bogdan, Richardson or a possible draft pick overtakes him. I could see Heild as a player who provides a scoring punch off the bench.

Just my opinion but I'm not ready to lock anyone into this team as a starter for years to come.

Your a Celtics fan who has consistently shown to not have as high of an opinion on our players as the boards' mean IMO. Buddy was putting up an efficient, confident 15 here as a rookie and showed improvement progressively in a lot of areas. I think he can be a quality 20 ppg scorer in this league. Our management is high on him as well.

 

[206Fan]

No, you haven't seen anyone compare him to Harden. Harden is a top 5 player. "Lite" just means he may be able to create as a ball dominant playmaker in time, no matter if he's only a top 6-7 SG, which I think is in reason

lol I know right. Celticsfan and Dimedropper are off base here. Ockingsfan is the first guy I've seen with high expectations for Buddy.. 20ppg isn't entirely unrealistic either. It's a lot of optimism, but not unrealistic. 20ppg would be around 30th overall.
Most fans on here agree that Buddy is probably a 3rd scoring option, maybe #2 if he keeps on improving. No one expects him to become a franchise player.

You're thinking long term and I like it. This is exactly why its important to take BPA. I just think that the reasoning for not selecting DSJ is entirely too flimsy to use if he is still available at our pick. The guy is going to be a hell of a player.

Yeah, DSJ continues to be a touchy subject. I like BPA too, but Monk is my only exception. I just don't think we can justify a selection at SG when we already have Buddy, Bogdanovic, and Richardson. Unless Monk really shows off some fantastic PG skills in workouts, I'd pass on him.

 

[bajaden]

I was incredibly encouraged by Hield's numbers down the stretch. His 3P% with Sacramento would have put him 6th in the NBA just behind JJ Redick and ahead of Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, CJ McCollum, Bradley Beal etc.

Can he do that for a season? After all, he only shot 37% in New Orleans (and 39% overall vs 48% with the Kings) so there's reason to think it was a bit of a fluke.

But I think the way he was used by Joerger was different (and much better) and he was allowed to play his game so there's good reason to hope it wasn't.

At the very least I think Hield has shown enough to warrant a starting gig next season. And I think he's going to be an NBA starter for years. A star? That's a stretch at the moment, but he did show some flashes.

You dead right about how Joerger used Hield. If you watched how he played in college, you would see that Joerger used him the same way. Shooters need to shoot, and they need shots. He wasn't getting that opportunity in New Orleans. They were trying to turn him into a stand in the corner and wait for the ball player. Very similar to how we were trying to use Stauskas. Joerger put the ball in Hields hands and gave him the green light. Shooters are going to miss some shots, but good shooters will eventually zero in and begin to hit shots. Thing is, they need to get shots.

I remember games with Peja where he was 1/7 in the first half of a game and ended up 7/14 at the end of the game. Of course the shooter has to have the mentality of every shot is going in, and will keep shooting. That was McLemore's problem. He missed a couple of shots, and then started passing up shots. If your a shooter, and your not shooting, then you need to be on the bench.

 

[Dime Dropper]

No, you haven't seen anyone compare him to Harden. Harden is a top 5 player. "Lite" just means he may be able to create as a ball dominant playmaker in time, no matter if he's only a top 6-7 SG, which I think is in reason

That's exactly what I said, read my post again. Buddy does not have the skillset to be a playmaker ala Harden, even a "lite" version. Expecting that isn't fair to him and is setting him up for failure. He's an average to below average ball-handler, with average passing for a SG. That doesn't translate to Harden lite, unless it's Harden lite to the point where every other offensively competent SG is also Harden lite.

 

[bajaden]

I feel bad for Buddy when people have these expectations. The guy has played one season of ok hoops and people now have expectations of the guy being a star. That would put him right under Booker for PPG and right above Wade in reference to 20 ppg scoring SG's this season.

View attachment 6715

If Buddy becomes a legitimate 20ppg SG that would make him one of the best in the league and a max contract type player. IMO Buddy isn't a number one scorer on a good playoff team or even a number 2. Maybe he develops into one but from what he's shown I don't think its a guarantee. When watching the Kings young players you have to remember that they are a bad team. Someone has to take shots, someone has to score. Get Buddy on a playoff team and there just won't be enough opportunities for him to average 20 ppg IMO.

What's lost from your equation. Your putting the cart before the horse and then saying it will never work. Of course not! It's about opportunity, and Buddy is in the right place at the right time. What if Buddy turns the Kings into a playoff team. If so, then he'll get plenty of shots. Just like Cousins eventually got plenty of shots. If you stick Buddy back on the Pel's right now, your right, he won't get a lot of shots because of Cousins and Davis. But that's not the case with the Kings.

If you can't see Buddy as a 20 points a game player, it's because you don't want to. Personally I don't care. If he can keep doing what he did after he arrived here, I'm happy. He averaged 15 pts a game, and he did with ease and in a variety of ways. He'll only get better as he learns the league. It's amazing how hard workers end up being good players.

 

[bajaden]

That's exactly what I said, read my post again. Buddy does not have the skillset to be a playmaker ala Harden, even a "lite" version. Expecting that isn't fair to him and is setting him up for failure. He's an average to below average ball-handler, with average passing for a SG. That doesn't translate to Harden lite, unless it's Harden lite to the point where every other offensively competent SG is also Harden lite.

Harden is a poor comparison. Harden was actually the PG for Arizona St. when he was there, even though he was listed as a SG. Buddy doesn't have to be Harden lite. Why do we always compare players to superstars? Comparing him to Bradley Beal or C. J. McCollum would be a better comparison. At least in how they're used. Here's a thought, why don't we wait and see. Maybe in a couple of years, they'll be comparing players to Buddy. You never know.

 

[Dime Dropper]

lol I know right. Celticsfan and Dimedropper are off base here.

No, you're not going to claim that without backing it up. Give me something specific that I said that's off base. I haven't criticised Buddy at all, nor have I said he can't be a good player. I said expectations from some people are too high. The idea that his skillset is somewhere in the ballpark of Harden lite, in particular, is a pretty lofty expectation. And certainly more off base than my assertion that he doesn't have the handles, driving ability, or passing to be considered a Harden lite type player. If anything, he's more like a smaller, less potent Klay without the defense. Potential to be a great shooter who occasionally gets to the basket. Average passer and ball handler for a SG.

Most fans on here agree that Buddy is probably a 3rd scoring option, maybe #2 if he keeps on improving. No one expects him to become a franchise player.

You won't find me disagreeing with this, so you might want to be more specific as to what I actually said that's off base. Throwing out silly blanket statements doesn't help your position.

 

[206Fan]

You dead right about how Joerger used Hield. If you watched how he played in college, you would see that Joerger used him the same way. Shooters need to shoot, and they need shots. He wasn't getting that opportunity in New Orleans. They were trying to turn him into a stand in the corner and wait for the ball player. Very similar to how we were trying to use Stauskas. Joerger put the ball in Hields hands and gave him the green light. Shooters are going to miss some shots, but good shooters will eventually zero in and begin to hit shots. Thing is, they need to get shots.

I remember games with Peja where he was 1/7 in the first half of a game and ended up 7/14 at the end of the game. Of course the shooter has to have the mentality of every shot is going in, and will keep shooting. That was McLemore's problem. He missed a couple of shots, and then started passing up shots. If your a shooter, and your not shooting, then you need to be on the bench.

Agree with you! The one thing I'm scared of next year is that Joerger will make Buddy "earn his minutes". Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I could see him decreasing Buddy's offensive role. The last 20 games were fun because it was all player development. However, Joerger is such a damn competitive coach, and he's not going to operate this year like a tanking year *cough* Earl Watson *cough*. I think Buddy is an off-ball SG, but he's much more versatile with the ball in his hands. The development of his odd mid-range game paired with improved ball handling can make him a dynamic threat from all 3 levels.
Another problem we'll encounter next year is that we'll have Bogdanovic. Another good shooter who does a good job off the ball, but in contract to Hield, I think Bogdanovic is more dependent than Hield as an on-ball player. I'm sure coach has watched a ton more tape than I have, so he'll begin to fit Bogdanovic in his offense.
I guess I'm becoming more accepting to the idea of Bogdanovic at the untraditional PG slot. Bogdanovic-Hield backcourt could work offensively if both players improve their ball handling. I think Buddy's ball handling was loose, but he shows a lot of potential as a secondary ball handler. Bogdanovic right now, has shown that he can be a secondary ball handler. If both guys can up their ball handling game a bit, then I could see it working. They could be a very good dynamic duo. On defense, we might suffer, but Willie is a good, potentially great PnR defender. With Willie, he can make up a lot of ground room for perimeter defense. This could open room for drafting another stout defensive player like Isaac or Anunoby.
It's fun trying to piece all of these things together.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Harden is a poor comparison. Harden was actually the PG for Arizona St. when he was there, even though he was listed as a SG. Buddy doesn't have to be Harden lite. Why do we always compare players to superstars? Comparing him to Bradley Beal or C. J. McCollum would be a better comparison. At least in how they're used. Here's a thought, why don't we wait and see. Maybe in a couple of years, they'll be comparing players to Buddy. You never know.

Agreed, that's pretty much the point I'm making. Comparing him to Harden in any shape or form is setting him up for failure as he doesn't have a similar skillset, not even a "lite" version. There's nothing wrong with being on the level of Beal/McCollum, in fact I'd be ecstatic if he reached that level. I personally don't think he will but I hope I'm wrong.

 

[206Fan]

No, you're not going to claim that without backing it up. Give me something specific that I said that's off base. I haven't criticised Buddy at all, nor have I said he can't be a good player. I said expectations from some people are too high. The idea that his skillset is somewhere in the ballpark of Harden lite, in particular, is a pretty lofty expectation. And certainly more off base than my assertion that he doesn't have the handles, driving ability, or passing to be considered a Harden lite type player. If anything, he's more like a smaller, less potent Klay without the defense. Potential to be a great shooter who occasionally gets to the basket. Average passer and ball handler for a SG.

You won't find me disagreeing with this, so you might want to be more specific as to what I actually said that's off base. Throwing out silly blanket statements doesn't help your position.

Sorry Dime Dropper. I thought you guys meant that a majority of fans were expecting Buddy to be a franchise-type player. I was trying to say that I haven't seen any fans say that...yet. I think the fans who think Buddy can become more than #3 option are slim. A #3 scorer is where I see most Kings fans predicting him to be. Those who think he can become more than a #1 or 2 scorer is probably around 5%. I think right now, it's optimism more than expectations. So to make it clear, we're not disagree on anything lol. I agree with you. I think Hield is a franchise SG, but I see him as a #3 scoring option right now. He's a hard worker, and anything can happen.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Sorry Dime Dropper. I thought you guys meant that a majority of fans were expecting Buddy to be a franchise-type player. I was trying to say that I haven't seen any fans say that...yet. I think the fans who think Buddy can become more than #3 option are slim. A #3 scorer is where I see most Kings fans predicting him to be. Those who think he can become more than a #1 or 2 scorer is probably around 5%. I think right now, it's optimism more than expectations. So to make it clear, we're not disagree on anything lol. I agree with you. I think Hield is a franchise SG, but I see him as a #3 scoring option right now. He's a hard worker, and anything can happen.

Fair enough - I am always weary of putting too much expectations on young players as it often ends in disappointment through no fault of the player. Buddy is a very hard worker and doesn't lack belief/confidence which means he's likely going to max out his potential, whatever it may be. Hopefully it's higher than I imagine, that can only be a good thing.

 

[bajaden]

lol I know right. Celticsfan and Dimedropper are off base here. Ockingsfan is the first guy I've seen with high expectations for Buddy.. 20ppg isn't entirely unrealistic either. It's a lot of optimism, but not unrealistic. 20ppg would be around 30th overall.
Most fans on here agree that Buddy is probably a 3rd scoring option, maybe #2 if he keeps on improving. No one expects him to become a franchise player.


Yeah, DSJ continues to be a touchy subject. I like BPA too, but Monk is my only exception. I just don't think we can justify a selection at SG when we already have Buddy, Bogdanovic, and Richardson. Unless Monk really shows off some fantastic PG skills in workouts, I'd pass on him.

I've pointed out the reasons why I think one should be concerned about Smith, but if my choice is between Monk and Smith, then I'm taking Smith. Although I think Monk has a good feel for the game, and could be an additional mover of the ball, I think Bogdanovic is equally confident in that area, and Monk would be redundit. If I felt confident that Monk would be a star in the league, then I'd go ahead and draft him. But I'm not. I think he'll be a very good player, but right now I see him more as a Jamal Crawford type player. Could be wrong of course, and there's nothing wrong with being Jamal Crawford. But if I'm playing coulda, woulda, shoulda, I can see Smith being a bigger star than Monk, so therefore I would take Smith.

Sorry for being so long winded, but I want to be consistent. I know some think I don't like Smith. Not true, just have my reservations about him. But the only go so far.

 

[bajaden]

Fair enough - I am always weary of putting too much expectations on young players as it often ends in disappointment through no fault of the player. Buddy is a very hard worker and doesn't lack belief/confidence which means he's likely going to max out his potential, whatever it may be. Hopefully it's higher than I imagine, that can only be a good thing.

I think your being about as fair as possible. You've set a reasonable bar, and left the door open for more. I wish everyone thought that way. For some reason there's a group that insist that every draft pick be the next Michael Jordan, or a franchise maker. Hopeful view to have, but not very realistic. I ustually hope first that he turns out to be a solid NBA player, and second, a starter. Anything above that, and you've hit the jackpot. Like we did with Cousins, and bigtime with Isaiah. Sorry Jimmer!

Has anyone ever wondered how Jimmer's career would have turned out if we hadn't drafted Isaiah? He certainly would have gotten a lot more playing time, and maybe more commitment to his development. I wonder if somewhere hidden in his house if he has a little Isaiah doll that he sticks pins into.

 

[CelticsFan]

I think your being about as fair as possible. You've set a reasonable bar, and left the door open for more. I wish everyone thought that way. For some reason there's a group that insist that every draft pick be the next Michael Jordan, or a franchise maker. Hopeful view to have, but not very realistic. I ustually hope first that he turns out to be a solid NBA player, and second, a starter. Anything above that, and you've hit the jackpot. Like we did with Cousins, and bigtime with Isaiah. Sorry Jimmer!

+100 to your post.

 

[ockingsfan]

I feel bad for Buddy when people have these expectations. The guy has played one season of ok hoops and people now have expectations of the guy being a star. That would put him right under Booker for PPG and right above Wade in reference to 20 ppg scoring SG's this season.

View attachment 6715

If Buddy becomes a legitimate 20ppg SG that would make him one of the best in the league and a max contract type player. IMO Buddy isn't a number one scorer on a good playoff team or even a number 2. Maybe he develops into one but from what he's shown I don't think its a guarantee. When watching the Kings young players you have to remember that they are a bad team. Someone has to take shots, someone has to score. Get Buddy on a playoff team and there just won't be enough opportunities for him to average 20 ppg IMO.

Here is the thing about players in the NBA. If they are hard workers, they tend to improve.

Just because I think Buddy will be a 20 ppg shooting guard doesn't mean I am predicting "super stardom" for Buddy, but as I have said before, I think he can reach CJ McCollum level of play for the Kings. Which is a very solid starting SG, with potential for more.

Once Buddy got to the Kings, he put up 15ppg as a rookie. And I might say, he scored in a variety of different ways and with relative ease on most nights. He has an ultra quick release and a smooth stroke. He is a gym rat and is known as a tireless worker.

Also, the way the Kings are currently constructed, he will be the "go-to scorer" going into next year. Even if we draft a couple of good rookies, he will be the main scoring guy, out of the gate for coach Joeger. Coach Joeger puts his players in positions to succeed and you can see that he has confidence in Buddy.

I think the problem is that a lot of fans here are looking at the upcoming draft and next years draft for the Kings to find their "star" player.

But, a lot of these people are overlooking the young players we already have on this team, whom have already shown they can play in this league. Players tend to improve and I think that a couple of the players we have can potentially step up and be that "star" players everyone wants, in a couple of years.

 

[Kingsfan23]

I think your being about as fair as possible. You've set a reasonable bar, and left the door open for more. I wish everyone thought that way. For some reason there's a group that insist that every draft pick be the next Michael Jordan, or a franchise maker. Hopeful view to have, but not very realistic. I ustually hope first that he turns out to be a solid NBA player, and second, a starter. Anything above that, and you've hit the jackpot. Like we did with Cousins, and bigtime with Isaiah. Sorry Jimmer!

Has anyone ever wondered how Jimmer's career would have turned out if we hadn't drafted Isaiah? He certainly would have gotten a lot more playing time, and maybe more commitment to his development. I wonder if somewhere hidden in his house if he has a little Isaiah doll that he sticks pins into.

My initial thought or hope was that Buddy could be a prime playmaker, that's it. A single A Harden so that Monk could be an option. I still think that can be the case given my interpretation of Buddy's game. Maybe shouldn't have used Harden and just said prime backcourt playmaker, but I didn't think that would matter

 

[hrdboild]

If the first 7 players off the board were:

Fultz
Jackson
Ball
Tatum
Fox
Isaac
Smith Jr

Then there would be almost no PGs or SFs left on the board.

Monk/Ntilikina and Markkanen/Collins to me would be a disaster of a draft.

I'm a big Buddy Hield fan but if the Kings end up with 4 (or possibly 5) SGs and no impact players from this draft the future won't be looking very bright.

In this situation I would feel really good taking Frank Ntilikina at 8th. He's got a lot of question marks but if everyone else we'd really want is off the board it takes all the pressure off and that pick is a no-brainer for me. Unless you're not sold on Ntilikina but the more tape I watch on him the more I'm sold. For what the NBA is asking PGs to do right now -- initiate the pick and roll, space the floor, and find open shooters -- he should be more than capable. Unlike Mudiay and Exum -- recent biggish PG prospects who didn't play college ball and also came into the draft with a lot of question marks about level of competition -- he's already got the spot-up jumper which is huge for a guy with that much defensive potential. He's not getting a ton of playing time right now but he's looked really good playing against his age group and leading a team in the international tournaments. I really liked Timothe Luwawu last year and Ntilikina projects as an even better prospect because he's got a better jumper and experience as a lead guard. It'd be nice if he showed a little more blow-by ability as a ball-handler and a quicker release on his jumper, but those are nitpicks. Even though he maybe doesn't have the superstar ceiling of a guy like Dennis Smith Jr. I've toyed with moving him into my top 5 because no other guard in this draft -- not even De'Aaron Fox -- as the ability to be a lockdown defender at both guard positions.

The bigger question for me is what we should do if we have to choose between Smith and Ntilikina. I like both of these guys. You've got the higher ceiling with Smith and you've got the defensive potential with Ntilikina. My preference is always to go with defense, even in this case where you're maybe passing on a multi-year All Star. But it's a close call. If Isaac is there too that would be ideal -- take Isaac at 8 and grab whichever PG Dallas doesn't take. Or take the PG we like best at 8 regardless and think about trade-down options with #10 that could get us a young wing player (Harkless? Johnson?) and a lower first round pick. Other than Miles Bridges pulling out of the draft, I really like what I'm seeing on the board for us in the 8-10 range right now.

 

[Kingsfan23]

I think your being about as fair as possible. You've set a reasonable bar, and left the door open for more. I wish everyone thought that way. For some reason there's a group that insist that every draft pick be the next Michael Jordan, or a franchise maker. Hopeful view to have, but not very realistic. I ustually hope first that he turns out to be a solid NBA player, and second, a starter. Anything above that, and you've hit the jackpot. Like we did with Cousins, and bigtime with Isaiah. Sorry Jimmer!

Has anyone ever wondered how Jimmer's career would have turned out if we hadn't drafted Isaiah? He certainly would have gotten a lot more playing time, and maybe more commitment to his development. I wonder if somewhere hidden in his house if he has a little Isaiah doll that he sticks pins into.

'If' you were referring to my Harden post as your Jordan analogy I obviously do take exception as I have to some of your previous posts

The only thing I was intimating was that I think Buddy can develop into a prime playmaker guard ala Harden lite, and therefore I'm open to off ball guards with him in the future while some may not be, and I still believe that

 

[Kingster]

"His basketball IQ is middling, so he's going to take longer,"

This came right after you praised Ball's IQ. In the context in which it was written, it appears that you saying Fox has low BBIQ. Middling certainly isn't high!

Middling, as in in the middle, medium, mediocre, average, 100 IQ. Middling isn't low and it isn't high.

 

[Kingster]

Does anyone think Vivek might have starry eyes for Ball, and if we orchestrated a move up to grab him would you be disappointed ?

Say we moved to 2nd somehow and Fultz is gone. We take Ball. Happy? Disappointed?

I've said before that I believe Divac's #1 desire is to trade his two picks to move up in the top 3. To me, Ball is his kind of player, but Fultz and Jackson are also possibilities.

 

[Kingster]

I have lofty expectations for Hield and I don't think his upside is limited. Talk to me in 5 years time about his limited upside. (This is strangely similar to the old IT conversations, by the way).

 

[Jimbob]

I've said before that I believe Divac's #1 desire is to trade his two picks to move up in the top 3. To me, Ball is his kind of player, but Fultz and Jackson are also possibilities.

Not sure if I like it, but it could be the difference of landing a star to go with our promising supporting cast.

 

[bajaden]

'If' you were referring to my Harden post as your Jordan analogy I obviously do take exception as I have to some of your previous posts

The only thing I was intimating was that I think Buddy can develop into a prime playmaker guard ala Harden lite, and therefore I'm open to off ball guards with him in the future while some may not be, and I still believe that

Actually, I was referring in general. I had no idea who brought up the Harden idea. But hey, it you want to take offense, be my guest.

 

[biltalent]

If Isaac is our guy at #8 I wouldnt mind trying to trade down from #10 to #15 and #20 and taking Donovan Mitchell and Jawun Evans. As I said before, I'm optimistic Mitchell will be able to play point guard in Joergers high post offense down the road. Also, the dude is just a winner. And Evans is an excellent push the pace guy to bring of your bench. We saw this year what immense value a good bench guard in Lawson gave us.

Roster could look like this next year:
Vet PG / Galloway / Evans / Mitchell*
Hield / Temple / Richardson
Isaac / Bogdanovic
Tolliver / Skal
Koufos / Wcs / PapaG*

* assigned to dleague
Still one roster spot left to upgrade at the 4 or take on a bad contract for future assets

Love the versatility that would give us down the road:
"Smother-them-with-size lineup": Mitchell-Bogdan-Isaac-Skal-PapaG
"Going-small-without-being-small lineup": Evans-Mitchell-Bogdan-Isaac-Skal
And finally, to please our owner, I proudly present the "keeping-up-with-the-Warriors lineup":
Evans-Mitchell-Hield-Bogdan-Isaac

 

[Tetsujin]

I feel bad for Buddy when people have these expectations. The guy has played one season of ok hoops and people now have expectations of the guy being a star. That would put him right under Booker for PPG and right above Wade in reference to 20 ppg scoring SG's this season.

View attachment 6715

If Buddy becomes a legitimate 20ppg SG that would make him one of the best in the league and a max contract type player. IMO Buddy isn't a number one scorer on a good playoff team or even a number 2. Maybe he develops into one but from what he's shown I don't think its a guarantee. When watching the Kings young players you have to remember that they are a bad team. Someone has to take shots, someone has to score. Get Buddy on a playoff team and there just won't be enough opportunities for him to average 20 ppg IMO.

If Marcus effing Thornton can average 19 ppg in a season is it really that hard to imagine Buddy Buckets getting 20 a game?

 

[Joshoua]

The 76ers hold the key to us having a very good backcourt. If they take Monk at 4 than Orlando has to take Tatum, Minnesota can't take a pg, and I think NY is penciled into Frank that would net us a Fox/Hield backcourt