Who do we draft?
- Thread starter Folsomkingsfan
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, I saw the same interview and agree with you. I really, really like Fox, and personally, I would trade both our picks to move up and draft him. I would prefer not to use both picks, but if that's what it would take, I'd do it. I loved how Fox adjusted his game in the second UCLA/Kentucky meeting and outplayed Ball. Just one game I know, but he rose to the occasion. He wasn't going to let Ball and UCLA beat them again.
Saw Jackson play a lot this year and in one regard, there's some truth to the fact that others on the team were more highlighted. My main complaint with Jackson is that he's more of a shoot first PG than a pass first PG. He can defend, but as you noted, his ball handling, while adequate for a SG, is a little loose for a PG. But mostly my problem is his mentality. Great athlete, and if he's coachable, might be able to make the leap to playing PG in the NBA. But if drafted, I see him spending more time in Reno than on the Kings. Which wouldn't be a bad thing.
He played well in the five on five game at the combine, but once again, he showcased his scoring ability. Of course in today's NBA, scoring from the PG position seems more important than assists, so who knows.
He played well in the five on five game at the combine, but once again, he showcased his scoring ability. Of course in today's NBA, scoring from the PG position seems more important than assists, so who knows.
Not so much him, but it's hard to imagine Lavar staying quiet about his son playing in Sacramento. Bad for business and the brand he's trying to build. Especially with a coach like Joerger, where young guys have to earn their minutes, I can see Lavar bad mouthing coach for not playing his son enough.
If he's there at 8 somehow, you have to take him because he's so talented, but I wouldn't feel good about the situation at all.
If he's there at 8 somehow, you have to take him because he's so talented, but I wouldn't feel good about the situation at all.
The idea that Ball could be available at 8 seems fantastical at best. But if he were, I'd be far, far, far from not feeling good about the situation. I'd take him and not look back for a second. Is his dad a loudmouth dummy? Yes. But the secret is, you just ignore him. Lonzo Ball is a quiet, humble, hardworking kid. He is nothing at all like his dad. If we got lucky enough to draft Lonzo Ball, we'd have about two months where the team's beat writers would hang on every word that Lavar said, and then they'd get tired of it. "Oh, Lavar Ball said something stupid AGAIN? I'm not Tweeting that out anymore, because he doesn't deserve the attention." That's eventually the decision that's going to get made. At some point the media are going to figure out that Lavar Ball is a loudmouthed guy with nothing to say, and they're going to ignore him. You just have to wait that out, and remember that it doesn't actually reflect on his son.
I agree with the Capt. If Ball is there you take him and deal with his dad after. We would get 5 years of Ball give or take, which is plenty of time for our team to make some noise after April for a change.
Not to mention if Ball doesnt end up in LA which I guess is where his family is (?) then we are next closest geographically while also having a lottery pick, a great young coach, a glaring need for a PG for the future, long quick bigs that can run in transition, our 3pt shooting AB was great, and the best arena in the league. (maybe get to see it oneday)
Worse places Ball could end up. His dad may be annoying but he isn't unintelligent and is simply trying to create hype. It might turn into a blessing in disguise for wherever he lands, who can say? Not I.
Not to mention if Ball doesnt end up in LA which I guess is where his family is (?) then we are next closest geographically while also having a lottery pick, a great young coach, a glaring need for a PG for the future, long quick bigs that can run in transition, our 3pt shooting AB was great, and the best arena in the league. (maybe get to see it oneday)
Worse places Ball could end up. His dad may be annoying but he isn't unintelligent and is simply trying to create hype. It might turn into a blessing in disguise for wherever he lands, who can say? Not I.
So just finished watching OG Anunoby tape (got interested after he got some hype in the thread and he was next on my list anyway) and if he gets an all-clear in medical testing, I'm probably moving him ahead of Isaac on my draft board. The guy is just a dynamite defensive player; simple as that. He has the length and size to handle NBA PF's as a small-ball 4 and the quickness and footwork to be a lockdown perimeter defender. I really love the fact that he takes pride in his defense too; he knows how he makes his bread and he wants to be an all-around elite defensive player. The length/size/athleticism attributes are all so tantalizing too; he's basically the prototype body that you want to stop SF's and PF's in today's NBA and I think he'll be able to check guards for limited stretches too. Similar to how I felt about Bridges, although not as much as good, he'll be a good rebounder at the next level too. Good instincts on both ends of the glass.
Offensively he profiles more of a role player rather than a guy who develops into a star on that end. But honestly, I don't really care. He's certainly not a bad offensive player now and one really nice thing about him is he knows his limitations on the offensive end. He's not going to come in and throw up 20 FGA/game. I wouldn't worry about the 3pt% dip from his Freshman to Sophomore season either; there's so much noise year to year on 3pt% and he didn't take near enough attempts in either season to really make much of it. He's got a shot and he was good in a spot-up shooter role; which is what we want from him. With a good PG (Fox or Teodosic), he'll be great in transition and on lob opportunities. For the first few years, I anticipate him being a low-volume, high-efficiency type of player.
Question for yall. Would you flip 8 to Detroit for 12 (Anunoby)+Stanley Johnson? How about 10 ?
Offensively he profiles more of a role player rather than a guy who develops into a star on that end. But honestly, I don't really care. He's certainly not a bad offensive player now and one really nice thing about him is he knows his limitations on the offensive end. He's not going to come in and throw up 20 FGA/game. I wouldn't worry about the 3pt% dip from his Freshman to Sophomore season either; there's so much noise year to year on 3pt% and he didn't take near enough attempts in either season to really make much of it. He's got a shot and he was good in a spot-up shooter role; which is what we want from him. With a good PG (Fox or Teodosic), he'll be great in transition and on lob opportunities. For the first few years, I anticipate him being a low-volume, high-efficiency type of player.
Question for yall. Would you flip 8 to Detroit for 12 (Anunoby)+Stanley Johnson? How about 10 ?
Chad Ford is at it again with the sone agents might want their clients to avoid working out here. Last year it didn't seem a huge issue as we had a later pick at 8, though to my knowledge really only brought in Baldwin. It was particularly embarrassing the year before when players like Winslow worked out for teams slotted 4/5/7/8 with us at 6. How big of a problem will this be? Normally I'd say if you don't want to be here we don't want you here but there is a consensus 11 with us picking 10. Nice to see guys like Fox though already saying non negative things
I wouldn't flip 8, but I might flip 10, depending on what my choices were. I like Anunoby a lot, but I like Isaac more, and both guys are terrific defenders. I just think that Isaac has more upside on the offensive of the ball. I also like Stanley Johnson, and in a way, Johnson and Anunoby are similar players, with Anunoby being taller and with more length. I think it will come down to who is on the board when we choose. You have to remember, there's no guarantee that the team at 11 won't take Anunoby. It would be a small gamble, but a gamble non the less.
I just worry that Isaac is going to have problems tapping into that offensive potential because of his frame and he's not aggressive at all on the offensive end.
If Anunonby gets the all-clear, I basically have no concern that he won't be a stud defensive player at the 3 and the 4 in the NBA. Watched some more tape this morning and the kid is flat out legit on that end. To me, it's a matter of how well a team can develop his offensive game that will determine if he's a star or not.
If Anunonby gets the all-clear, I basically have no concern that he won't be a stud defensive player at the 3 and the 4 in the NBA. Watched some more tape this morning and the kid is flat out legit on that end. To me, it's a matter of how well a team can develop his offensive game that will determine if he's a star or not.
I'm biased when it comes to Isaac, and I saw him play a lot. Most of his lack of offense came from the system he was playing in. It was frustrating to watch most of Florida St.'s games because of the the substitution pattern they used. Their offense was dominated by their guards. Think Derrick Favors in college. He hardly touched the ball, and if you didn't watch a ton of games, you would have thought he had little to no offense. Isaac is a far better ball handler than Anunoby, and has more game away from the basket than Anunoby. Look, I'm not trying to disparage Aunnoby. I really like him, I just happen to think that Isaac has a higher overall ceiling.
Let me put it this way. I think Isaac has a chance to be a star in the league. I can't say the same thing about Anunoby. But hey, I could be dead wrong. One thing I can't argue about is who has the NBA body. Anunoby wins that contest hands down. The way I look at it, is that Isaac is the prize, and Anunoby is good alternative if you can't get him. As for as his build and lack of strength, lets remember that Durant weighed about a buck ninety-five coming out of college, and couldn't bench press 185 pounds one time at the combine. He turned out pretty good. Not saying it can't be an issue, but it's not my biggest concern.
Let me put it this way. I think Isaac has a chance to be a star in the league. I can't say the same thing about Anunoby. But hey, I could be dead wrong. One thing I can't argue about is who has the NBA body. Anunoby wins that contest hands down. The way I look at it, is that Isaac is the prize, and Anunoby is good alternative if you can't get him. As for as his build and lack of strength, lets remember that Durant weighed about a buck ninety-five coming out of college, and couldn't bench press 185 pounds one time at the combine. He turned out pretty good. Not saying it can't be an issue, but it's not my biggest concern.
I really like OG and was disappointed when he got hurt. On top of his size and talent I just got an eye of the tiger feeling from him listening to earlier interviews. I also am in the small camp that believes you can be a star with top notch defense and acceptable efficient offense which he has shown. He can always get better there too.
I could be wrong about him of course and who knows how well he can play post injury. I think a defensive stopper on the wings in the vein of Ron Artest coupled with a WCS/Skal/Papa front court rotation could be quite a foundation, especially if defensive stops are just as exciting for you as offense as it is with me.
I could be wrong about him of course and who knows how well he can play post injury. I think a defensive stopper on the wings in the vein of Ron Artest coupled with a WCS/Skal/Papa front court rotation could be quite a foundation, especially if defensive stops are just as exciting for you as offense as it is with me.
@Kingsfan23
Although it is unfortunate if what Chad Ford is saying is true, we have to be honest. Building or rebuilding a good reputation can take significant time. Where as destroying a reputation can be done in the blink of an eye. You draft who you want within your powers and repair the reputation through actions, not the hiring of a front office suit.
Chad Ford listed two teams that agents supposedly instructed clients to avoid, the other being the Boston Celtics. Now we all know the reasoning would be different but the effect the same. I would almost guarantee Danny Ainge isn't batting an eye about it.
Although it is unfortunate if what Chad Ford is saying is true, we have to be honest. Building or rebuilding a good reputation can take significant time. Where as destroying a reputation can be done in the blink of an eye. You draft who you want within your powers and repair the reputation through actions, not the hiring of a front office suit.
Chad Ford listed two teams that agents supposedly instructed clients to avoid, the other being the Boston Celtics. Now we all know the reasoning would be different but the effect the same. I would almost guarantee Danny Ainge isn't batting an eye about it.
Not really feeling the Isaac hype, I don't see his ceiling as very high. He is at best a defensive specialist in the league but that's just my view on things. I hope the Kings don't draft him, but if he is available and the PGs are off the board, then BPA might be the best strategy and I'll have no other choice but to support him because he is a King.
Hey, to some extent, it's a crapshoot. We need a SF, and we have little or no chance of getting Tatum, so in my opinion, Isaac is the next best choice, but there are no guarantee's. Isaac is a late bloomer, with a similar story as Anthony Davis. He went from being a 6'3" SG to a 6'11" SF overnight. The positive from that is that his ballhandling skills came with him. The negative from it is that he's still getting used to his body. Two years from now, the best SF out of this draft might be Justin Jackson, a player most people aren't talking about.
Jackson is a player that I had no use for starting the season. Mainly because he came out of highschool as one of the top players, and then proceeded to totally underachieve for two years. But this season he made a believer out of me. If he were a freshman, he'd probably be ranked higher based on just this year. But because he's a junior, he'll probably get drafted in the middle to late first round. To be honest, I think the Kings would be fine with either Isaac, Anunoby, or Jackson. And one of those three will probably be a star. I wish I hadn't loaned out my crystal ball.
Jackson is a player that I had no use for starting the season. Mainly because he came out of highschool as one of the top players, and then proceeded to totally underachieve for two years. But this season he made a believer out of me. If he were a freshman, he'd probably be ranked higher based on just this year. But because he's a junior, he'll probably get drafted in the middle to late first round. To be honest, I think the Kings would be fine with either Isaac, Anunoby, or Jackson. And one of those three will probably be a star. I wish I hadn't loaned out my crystal ball.
Just watched an interview with all 4 of our 2016 rookies on Bleacher Report. Nice group that seem to enjoy each other a lot. It would be great to see them all grow together so I hope Malachi can play some 3 to get his minutes in.
Buddy's favorite music is reggae which makes sense coming from the Caribbean, but I found that refreshing. I was fortunate enough to catch Bob Marley at UCD about a year before he died. probably my all time favorite concert.
Buddy's favorite music is reggae which makes sense coming from the Caribbean, but I found that refreshing. I was fortunate enough to catch Bob Marley at UCD about a year before he died. probably my all time favorite concert.
Why would you instruct your clients to avoid the celtics? I don't get that part. If I'm a top draft pick I would love to get draftet by them. Your going to get a high rookie contract, youre well regard by other teams and you get to play for a winning franchise instead of a franchise in rebuilding mode like the Suns or the Kings.
So what did Ford say? Because there is a possibility to get traded?
So what did Ford say? Because there is a possibility to get traded?
I found it on celticsblog.com, they have put the whole quote up 
http://www.celticsblog.com/2017/5/1...ding-boston-celtics-because-they-are-too-good
So basically the fear is not knowing whether their clients will get traded or get enough playing time/exposure.
http://www.celticsblog.com/2017/5/1...ding-boston-celtics-because-they-are-too-good
So basically the fear is not knowing whether their clients will get traded or get enough playing time/exposure.
I got so carried away with reggae on my last post I forgot the main reason for the post.
All 4 2016 rookies mentioned Temple as the best mentor influence, but that was followed by DC. Should be interesting if he is part of the plan going forward.
Depending on how the draft order plays out and who is available where, I could see trading up, say our two picks for Fox and keep DC around for leadership.
All 4 2016 rookies mentioned Temple as the best mentor influence, but that was followed by DC. Should be interesting if he is part of the plan going forward.
Depending on how the draft order plays out and who is available where, I could see trading up, say our two picks for Fox and keep DC around for leadership.
If we were talking trading down in OG range with our 8th pick..I'd rather deal with Denver and possibly land Wilson Chandler and 14 for 8 and salary dump(Afflalo perhaps, maybe Tolliver).
Chandler is a good 2 way player. Can bring similar offensive punch as Rudy without the ball dominance(though he is a capable In ISO situations) and the command of huge minutes..and to my knowledge is a good character guy who lacks a defined role being primarily a SF now in Denver with Gallinari and the youth movement at SG with Harris, Murray, Barton, Beasley, and Mudiay. There was rumblings about his expendability and him feeling underused unless Malone was punishing Faried during a lazy spell, and using Gallo at the 4 and Chandler at the 3. He's very expendable for them(assuming they keep Gallo around) and they'll want to move up to PG range. I think Chandler would be a great fit for the Kings.
I'm personally not sold on OG. He just has that Ron Ron build and even runs with the same stride as Ron...but he is a project that could turn out regrettable. I'm becoming wary of Indiana products as well. Id probably rather try Issac but not sold on him either.
I'd still do a trade with Denver if it landed Chandler though. Even better if it can be done with the Pelicans pick. A lot of good big man prospects in the 14-20 range as well.
Nothing straight up though. I intend for the Kings to have two lottery picks..but open to seeing one go a few picks down if it lands the Kings a good vet at a position of need(Chandler) and still gives us a chance to get a high level prospect. I'm not too concerned with filling positional needs with draft picks. Just building assets and getting who our basketball guys feel are the best guys. Immediate positional needs shouldn't figure into the draft IMO. The immediate need for lottery teams is assets.
Chandler is a good 2 way player. Can bring similar offensive punch as Rudy without the ball dominance(though he is a capable In ISO situations) and the command of huge minutes..and to my knowledge is a good character guy who lacks a defined role being primarily a SF now in Denver with Gallinari and the youth movement at SG with Harris, Murray, Barton, Beasley, and Mudiay. There was rumblings about his expendability and him feeling underused unless Malone was punishing Faried during a lazy spell, and using Gallo at the 4 and Chandler at the 3. He's very expendable for them(assuming they keep Gallo around) and they'll want to move up to PG range. I think Chandler would be a great fit for the Kings.
I'm personally not sold on OG. He just has that Ron Ron build and even runs with the same stride as Ron...but he is a project that could turn out regrettable. I'm becoming wary of Indiana products as well. Id probably rather try Issac but not sold on him either.
I'd still do a trade with Denver if it landed Chandler though. Even better if it can be done with the Pelicans pick. A lot of good big man prospects in the 14-20 range as well.
Nothing straight up though. I intend for the Kings to have two lottery picks..but open to seeing one go a few picks down if it lands the Kings a good vet at a position of need(Chandler) and still gives us a chance to get a high level prospect. I'm not too concerned with filling positional needs with draft picks. Just building assets and getting who our basketball guys feel are the best guys. Immediate positional needs shouldn't figure into the draft IMO. The immediate need for lottery teams is assets.
Last edited:
Not sure about Chandler. This team will be vying for a top pick next year, not competing, and Garrett might have to play a lot of three as we will also have Hield/Richardson/Bogdanovic at 2/wings.
For me if we trade back it would have to be for a young asset as we rebuild
As for The_Jamal's original question I'd do 10 for 12/Johnson in a heartbeat, 8 as well if we saw a PG falling
For me if we trade back it would have to be for a young asset as we rebuild
As for The_Jamal's original question I'd do 10 for 12/Johnson in a heartbeat, 8 as well if we saw a PG falling
I truly feel some team will take a flyer on Diallo. A trusted local Kentucky Sports website reported that in an interview John Calipari made it clear to NBA executives that if a team promise to draft Diallo in the first round and did not that they would no longer be allowed at the open UK practices and that he would not work with those teams in giving honest evaluations.
That may sound harmless but John Calipari has been well known while at UK to give honest feedback on his players for good or for bad. He has stated before that the reason for this is because in many drafts he has multiple players going into the NBA. He advises them of what they need before they come to campus and before they make the decision to stay in school or go to the draft. A couple of famous examples is how much he hyped up John Wall and Jamal Murray. Simultaneously he also spoke very poorly of Daniel Orton, yet, the Magic took a flier anyway. (Look how that turned out).
Many of you with Sacramento connections can confirm or deny this report but when the Kings were considering taking Skal, they contacted Calipari when asked for the his thoughts on him and basically made it clear to him that if he screwed them on Skal, they wouldn't take another UK player. The report continues that basically Calipari told them the goods and the bads and told them to make their own decision. The rest seems to be great history with a bright future player.
That may sound harmless but John Calipari has been well known while at UK to give honest feedback on his players for good or for bad. He has stated before that the reason for this is because in many drafts he has multiple players going into the NBA. He advises them of what they need before they come to campus and before they make the decision to stay in school or go to the draft. A couple of famous examples is how much he hyped up John Wall and Jamal Murray. Simultaneously he also spoke very poorly of Daniel Orton, yet, the Magic took a flier anyway. (Look how that turned out).
Many of you with Sacramento connections can confirm or deny this report but when the Kings were considering taking Skal, they contacted Calipari when asked for the his thoughts on him and basically made it clear to him that if he screwed them on Skal, they wouldn't take another UK player. The report continues that basically Calipari told them the goods and the bads and told them to make their own decision. The rest seems to be great history with a bright future player.
Wilson Chandler does to fit this team going forward, at least for now. Going to be too young.....stay with your youth movement. Give playing time to the youngsters. Sign a similar FA as Temple and Tolliver in FA if needed. We are investing in youth, don't change it now.
And unless we are getting a young player and pick to trade down.....why trade out of the top 11 guys to get a lesser prospect. The Stanley Johnson deals bandied about here may fit that criteria except that you mayend up with 2 lesser prospecty type guys while trading a higher upside prospect. I'd start trading up if anything....not down.
And unless we are getting a young player and pick to trade down.....why trade out of the top 11 guys to get a lesser prospect. The Stanley Johnson deals bandied about here may fit that criteria except that you mayend up with 2 lesser prospecty type guys while trading a higher upside prospect. I'd start trading up if anything....not down.
I know we already have three young bigs but honestly I would be happy if we took Zach Collins. He just fits the modern game so well. 7 ft tall, mobile, athletic, can shoot from the outside, good hands, good touch, defensive timing. If we are looking 3-5 years down the line Skal, WCS, Collins, Papa? Can be a frontline that can really attack small ball if the league keeps trending that way. With that said the more i research the top 10-12 of this draft its pretty easy to be optimistic about anyone we take. It seems we will likely be in a position where we just take whoever drops to us.
- Status