Marvin Bagley III

[Ozymandias]

I don't disagree with much of what you said. Funny, if he had been in last years class, he certainly would have been under consideration for the first pick in the draft, but this year, with so many talented big men, he's sort of getting lost in the shuffle a bit. I think he's a better athlete than Gobert and he could eventually be a much better offensive player than Gobert. My concern for the Kings is of course the time factor, and fit. I don't deny his talent.

I think he fits quite well, the kings defense leaves much to be desired. Watching Zach Randolph guard opposing C's is brutal IMO. Bagley IMO is either gonna get dunked on a good bit or make a bunch of 'business decisions' and avoid the contest.

Duke was rediculously bad at man-to-man defense this year despite having a pair of top-10 bigs. The team would've been a complete disaster if not for their zone.

basically rookie year u give mo 15-20 mins a night and it goes well u give him as much as he can handle.. WCS can play next to him, as can skal and Giles. 2nd season the training wheels go off and there's a major competition for minutes, perhaps 3 of those 4 can handle near 30mpg.

If the picks bagley i cant help but think skal and giles are just his placeholder and a bit redundant. U cant expect Bagley and Skal to provide much defensively on the court vs nba bigs.

The time factor is the only reason the kings will pass. They have no 1st rd pick in 2019, Vlade set out a 2 year deadline after the Cousins trade, Mo is one of, if not the safest long term bet, Fox and Bamba are great bookends, theyll probably be looking for bigger jumpstart than he can provide tho.

 

[jcassio]

after a number of draft blunders, have we not learned anything about drafting for fit over talent?

I question BPA every year at this time. Not because it isn’t a good policy; it is. And we have made some blundering picks that clearly were not BPA picks!
But I question it because sometimes it is not clear that player A is a better BPA choice than player B. When that happens, you can and should factor in fit. The problem is, fit has a way of becoming a dominant criteria for dreamers. As in believing that Jimmer would be an NBA point guard.

 

[kingsboi]

Fit does come into it to a certain extent, but in our case it shouldn't be a major problem. If we view Fox, Bogdanovic and Willie as long term starters, the only prospect from the so-called top seven that wouldn't fit is Young. Everyone else does fit: Porter can play SF or PF, Bagley can play PF, JJJ can play PF or C, Ayton and Bamba can play C with Willie moving to PF, and Doncic can play SF.

In our case it comes down to which prospect we feel has the most upside but in regards to fit Bagley is perhaps not the most ideal to pair with Willie because neither offer much in the way of shot blocking. So perhaps fit wise JJJ is better because he can block shots and offer floor spacing which makes up for two deficiencies in Willie's game. Bagley and JJJ both have tremendous upside but one is potentially a better fit so that could be our logic in going for JJJ over Bagley. However, I am a Bagley fan and would take him and worry about shot blocking at a later date.

Now I do agree with you that we should draft BPA over fit, but with high upside prospects available at 2 we can pick a prospect that fits with what we've got if we intend to build long term with what we've got.

I don't know if I consider Willie a moving block moving forward. I question his desire for basketball and desire to improve sometimes. I know he wants to be an offensive player and unleash that side of his game, but he doesn't use his strengths enough for my liking. This year will be very telling for Willie and the Kings moving forward since its a contract year so if this year he doesn't show enough improvement then I think the Kings need to go in another direction. Only issue that lies here is, say the Kings want to make him available at the trade deadline with teams knowing he is a upcoming free agent, the return won't net the Kings much in value to begin with so they would be forced to trade him for pennies on the dollar or lose him for nothing which is possible as well.

 

[kingsboi]

I question BPA every year at this time. Not because it isn’t a good policy; it is. And we have made some blundering picks that clearly were not BPA picks!
But I question it because sometimes it is not clear that player A is a better BPA choice than player B. When that happens, you can and should factor in fit. The problem is, fit has a way of becoming a dominant criteria for dreamers. As in believing that Jimmer would be an NBA point guard.

When you are in a position the Kings are in, rebuilding, second pick in the draft, looking for a star player is the absolute key here. If the best player available plays the same position as your current best young prospect, so be it. You figure it out along the way or make a trade for another pick/player. The Kings are in no position to pass up talent. If they were drafting a bit further out of the lottery, then I can see fit becoming a good approach.

 

[roasthawg]

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/sport...i-might-not-succeed-next-level-190604768.html

 

[Kingster]

I don't know if I consider Willie a moving block moving forward. I question his desire for basketball and desire to improve sometimes. I know he wants to be an offensive player and unleash that side of his game, but he doesn't use his strengths enough for my liking. This year will be very telling for Willie and the Kings moving forward since its a contract year so if this year he doesn't show enough improvement then I think the Kings need to go in another direction. Only issue that lies here is, say the Kings want to make him available at the trade deadline with teams knowing he is a upcoming free agent, the return won't net the Kings much in value to begin with so they would be forced to trade him for pennies on the dollar or lose him for nothing which is possible as well.

If the Kings go big on draft day, they need to trade WCS, preferably on draft day. The idea from some that they are going to learn more about his motivation and motor in Year 4 is preposterous to me.

 

[jcassio]

When you are in a position the Kings are in, rebuilding, second pick in the draft, looking for a star player is the absolute key here. If the best player available plays the same position as your current best young prospect, so be it. You figure it out along the way or make a trade for another pick/player. The Kings are in no position to pass up talent. If they were drafting a bit further out of the lottery, then I can see fit becoming a good approach.

Just for the record, I'm agreeing with you. I'm just adding that fit can be a factor when all else is equal. But you've got to contain your desire for fit or it will become the tail that wags the dog.

 

[Kingster]

I'm sure that Skal is working out as I write this. His career depends on getting stronger, and adding some attitude to his game. He plays too nice at times, and he also defers when he shouldn't at times. When he has the open shot, he needs to take the open shot. If he misses, then he misses, but take the dam shot. I'd be lying if I didn't say I was disappointed last season.

But like you, I'm willing to give him another season to show he's worth keeping around. He doesn't have to have a breakout year, but he does have to show he's an NBA player with growth left. He needs to grab a role on the team and not let go of it. I still have high hopes! Hey, the would be a catchy title for a song!

I'm actually willing to give him two more years. I've seen him as a 4-year project ever since I saw him in his rookie year. He was very inexperienced as a basketball player when he was drafted, he was young, and he was long and thin, all factors that should contribute to patience. If you draft a project then you need to have patience with the project, not unload him early so another team can yield the fruit of your labors. He'll be only 23 years old the beginning of the 2019-2020 season, so it's not like he's going to be past his prime. Unlike WCS, I see no motivational or motor issues with Skal. I see him as a hard, conscientious worker virtually every time he's on the court. I continue to believe that patience will pay dividends.

 

[bajaden]

I think he fits quite well, the kings defense leaves much to be desired. Watching Zach Randolph guard opposing C's is brutal IMO. Bagley IMO is either gonna get dunked on a good bit or make a bunch of 'business decisions' and avoid the contest.

Duke was rediculously bad at man-to-man defense this year despite having a pair of top-10 bigs. The team would've been a complete disaster if not for their zone.

basically rookie year u give mo 15-20 mins a night and it goes well u give him as much as he can handle.. WCS can play next to him, as can skal and Giles. 2nd season the training wheels go off and there's a major competition for minutes, perhaps 3 of those 4 can handle near 30mpg.

If the picks bagley i cant help but think skal and giles are just his placeholder and a bit redundant. U cant expect Bagley and Skal to provide much defensively on the court vs nba bigs.

The time factor is the only reason the kings will pass. They have no 1st rd pick in 2019, Vlade set out a 2 year deadline after the Cousins trade, Mo is one of, if not the safest long term bet, Fox and Bamba are great bookends, theyll probably be looking for bigger jumpstart than he can provide tho.

Pretty good summery of the situation. I guess I'm looking at it from Vlade's point of view, and wondering just how secure am I?If Vivek is on board, and I feel confident that he's on board, then I wouldn't have as much reluctance when it comes to choosing Bamba. I feel as though he's 3 to 4 years away from reaching something close to his potential. Of course that doesn't mean he isn't contributing in the meantime. The question is, would that be enough?

As far as Giles and Skal being place holders if we were to choose Bagley, I think that may be true of Skal, but from everything I've heard or read, the Kings are extremely high on Giles, and I'm sure they aren't thinking of him as a place holder for anyone. Of course it's up to him to prove them right. If the Kings choose Bamba, I think it would help Willie, who puts up better numbers at the PF position than he does at the center position. Willie is a better defender on the perimeter than in the post. So the two of them could very well compliment each other. In an ironic way, Willie is actually good at what appear to be Bamba's weaknesses, and vice/versa.

 

[bajaden]

If the Kings go big on draft day, they need to trade WCS, preferably on draft day. The idea from some that they are going to learn more about his motivation and motor in Year 4 is preposterous to me.

Look, I'm not sure where this idea came from that Willie isn't motivated. I know that Willie is the current whipping boy, but what evidence is there that he's not motivated. At the beginning of last season, he was asked to move to the high post where they could work the ball through him at times. It was obvious that he was a fish out of water at times, but as the season went on, he started making the reads quicker and his passing out of there improved.

Do I think that Willie is hesitant at times? Yep! But that doesn't mean he's unmotivated, it just means he's slow to react. It's absolutely beyond me why, excepting an offer you can't refuse, you would want to trade away a player going into his 4th year that showed improvement the year before. For big men, the 4th year is typically the breakout year. When you consider that Willie came to the game of basketball late, maybe a tad more patience might be considered.

You know who will be the next whipping boy if Willie is traded. Skal!! And after that, who knows? Probably whomever we draft this season. There is a distinct difference between making mistakes, and lacking motivation. By all accounts, Willie is a hard worker, and is always working on his game. I think that some on this forum have their own ideas on what kind of player Willie should be, and because Willie has a different idea, then he lacks motivation. That my friends, is pure nonsense. Willie may be wrong, or those on the forum may be wrong, and thats a legit argument to have.

I would also suggest that just because a player we drafted isn't a superstar, doesn't mean he's not worth having on the team. It's not all or bust folks. You can be a solid contributing player in the rotation of a team and not be a star. The mood here seems to be that if the player isn't everything you wanted him to be, then we need to get rid of him. That's just plain idiotic. It's very possible that Willie eventually isn't a starter, but that doesn't mean he can't be an important contributor to the team.

 

[Folsomkingsfan]

Honestly I'm pretty indifferent between doncic, bamba, and Bagley at 2. I think all the 3 are good, high upside prospects that can help us going forward. That being said of all the guys we are considering, i see bagley being the one with the highest chance to be the guy that takes over in the late game.

 

[bajaden]

I question BPA every year at this time. Not because it isn’t a good policy; it is. And we have made some blundering picks that clearly were not BPA picks!
But I question it because sometimes it is not clear that player A is a better BPA choice than player B. When that happens, you can and should factor in fit. The problem is, fit has a way of becoming a dominant criteria for dreamers. As in believing that Jimmer would be an NBA point guard.

I want to clarify once again that when I'm speaking of fit, I'm not talking about positional fit. I'm talking about style of play fit. If your trying to put together a team that's unselfish, and that moves the ball, then you probably shouldn't draft a player that's great in isolation and is a poor passer. That's the kind of fit I'm referring to. Now if the player you like fits those characteristic's, and also happens to play a position of need, then great. Positional need is important, and positions need to be filled, but not by trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

 

[whozit]

Look, I'm not sure where this idea came from that Willie isn't motivated. I know that Willie is the current whipping boy, but what evidence is there that he's not motivated. At the beginning of last season, he was asked to move to the high post where they could work the ball through him at times. It was obvious that he was a fish out of water at times, but as the season went on, he started making the reads quicker and his passing out of there improved.

Do I think that Willie is hesitant at times? Yep! But that doesn't mean he's unmotivated, it just means he's slow to react. It's absolutely beyond me why, excepting an offer you can't refuse, you would want to trade away a player going into his 4th year that showed improvement the year before. For big men, the 4th year is typically the breakout year. When you consider that Willie came to the game of basketball late, maybe a tad more patience might be considered.

You know who will be the next whipping boy if Willie is traded. Skal!! And after that, who knows? Probably whomever we draft this season. There is a distinct difference between making mistakes, and lacking motivation. By all accounts, Willie is a hard worker, and is always working on his game. I think that some on this forum have their own ideas on what kind of player Willie should be, and because Willie has a different idea, then he lacks motivation. That my friends, is pure nonsense. Willie may be wrong, or those on the forum may be wrong, and thats a legit argument to have.

I would also suggest that just because a player we drafted isn't a superstar, doesn't mean he's not worth having on the team. It's not all or bust folks. You can be a solid contributing player in the rotation of a team and not be a star. The mood here seems to be that if the player isn't everything you wanted him to be, then we need to get rid of him. That's just plain idiotic. It's very possible that Willie eventually isn't a starter, but that doesn't mean he can't be an important contributor to the team.

I suspect part of that notion that he isn't motivated stems from the articles about his extracurricular interests such of going overseas for instruction into painting. I guess you can't have more than one interest in life.

 

[bajaden]

I don't know if I consider Willie a moving block moving forward. I question his desire for basketball and desire to improve sometimes. I know he wants to be an offensive player and unleash that side of his game, but he doesn't use his strengths enough for my liking. This year will be very telling for Willie and the Kings moving forward since its a contract year so if this year he doesn't show enough improvement then I think the Kings need to go in another direction. Only issue that lies here is, say the Kings want to make him available at the trade deadline with teams knowing he is a upcoming free agent, the return won't net the Kings much in value to begin with so they would be forced to trade him for pennies on the dollar or lose him for nothing which is possible as well.

As I stated in another post, the 4th year is traditionally the year big men have their breakout year, and for that reason I want to give Willie that 4th year. The fact that he wants to be more of a offensive player than some on this forum think he should is irrelevant. If he suddenly blossoms into a good offensive player, what's not to like?

Now if there's little to no improvement this coming season, the I think the team either has to entertain trade offers for him, or look at him as a bench player instead of a starter. However my gut tells me he's going to surprise everyone this year, and he better if he wants an extension with big bucks. I would also suggest that some of you do some research around the league and look at comparable players. I think you'll find that Willie isn't as bad as some of you think he is.

As I have pointed out, Willie's 3rd year (last year) is comparable, if not slightly better than the great Aaron Gordon's 3rd year in the league. His numbers are better in some areas than Derrick Favors numbers were last season and comparable in others. Maybe were being a bit to harsh on a player that didn't even start playing organized basketball until his junior year of highschool. Compare that to Giles who started playing when he was 6 years old. Just saying!

 

[bajaden]

I suspect part of that notion that he isn't motivated stems from the articles about his extracurricular interests such of going overseas for instruction into painting. I guess you can't have more than one interest in life.

So if Cousins goes to Israel with Casspi during the offseason, that's great. But if Willie goes to India, or where ever it is he went, he lacks desire! Right! Makes perfect sense...

 

[roasthawg]

As I stated in another post, the 4th year is traditionally the year big men have their breakout year, and for that reason I want to give Willie that 4th year. The fact that he wants to be more of a offensive player than some on this forum think he should is irrelevant. If he suddenly blossoms into a good offensive player, what's not to like?

Now if there's little to no improvement this coming season, the I think the team either has to entertain trade offers for him, or look at him as a bench player instead of a starter. However my gut tells me he's going to surprise everyone this year, and he better if he wants an extension with big bucks. I would also suggest that some of you do some research around the league and look at comparable players. I think you'll find that Willie isn't as bad as some of you think he is.

As I have pointed out, Willie's 3rd year (last year) is comparable, if not slightly better than the great Aaron Gordon's 3rd year in the league. His numbers are better in some areas than Derrick Favors numbers were last season and comparable in others. Maybe were being a bit to harsh on a player that didn't even start playing organized basketball until his junior year of highschool. Compare that to Giles who started playing when he was 6 years old. Just saying!

I second this. I'm not predicting a breakout year for Willie but I definitely wouldn't be surprised. Rudy Gobert is another one that saw his game elevated significantly in year four.

 

[sactowndog]

Look, I'm not sure where this idea came from that Willie isn't motivated. I know that Willie is the current whipping boy, but what evidence is there that he's not motivated. At the beginning of last season, he was asked to move to the high post where they could work the ball through him at times. It was obvious that he was a fish out of water at times, but as the season went on, he started making the reads quicker and his passing out of there improved.

Do I think that Willie is hesitant at times? Yep! But that doesn't mean he's unmotivated, it just means he's slow to react. It's absolutely beyond me why, excepting an offer you can't refuse, you would want to trade away a player going into his 4th year that showed improvement the year before. For big men, the 4th year is typically the breakout year. When you consider that Willie came to the game of basketball late, maybe a tad more patience might be considered.

You know who will be the next whipping boy if Willie is traded. Skal!! And after that, who knows? Probably whomever we draft this season. There is a distinct difference between making mistakes, and lacking motivation. By all accounts, Willie is a hard worker, and is always working on his game. I think that some on this forum have their own ideas on what kind of player Willie should be, and because Willie has a different idea, then he lacks motivation. That my friends, is pure nonsense. Willie may be wrong, or those on the forum may be wrong, and thats a legit argument to have.

I would also suggest that just because a player we drafted isn't a superstar, doesn't mean he's not worth having on the team. It's not all or bust folks. You can be a solid contributing player in the rotation of a team and not be a star. The mood here seems to be that if the player isn't everything you wanted him to be, then we need to get rid of him. That's just plain idiotic. It's very possible that Willie eventually isn't a starter, but that doesn't mean he can't be an important contributor to the team.

I think you can think WCS should be traded without being a hater.

The Kings will have Giles, Bagley/Ayton, WCS, Skal, Koufos, and ZBo on the roster.

If you assume Giles is the better player, based on practice, and Bagely/Ayton based on draft position then who else do you keep?

Koufos has a size and strength and a willingness to be a good bench guy that I would keep for certain matchups.

Skal has the potential to spread the floor and could be the best shooting big on the team.

Willie seems most redundant to the first two and the least likely to be a willing bench player. For those reasons, I would be open to trade offers but wouldn’t dump him for a bag of chips.

 

[LPKingsFan]

For what it's worth, while entertaining wild trade scenarios on Twitter regarding Embiid, Carmichael Dave is saying that WCS "is almost assuredly gone next year."

 

[sactowndog]

As I stated in another post, the 4th year is traditionally the year big men have their breakout year, and for that reason I want to give Willie that 4th year. The fact that he wants to be more of a offensive player than some on this forum think he should is irrelevant. If he suddenly blossoms into a good offensive player, what's not to like?

Now if there's little to no improvement this coming season, the I think the team either has to entertain trade offers for him, or look at him as a bench player instead of a starter. However my gut tells me he's going to surprise everyone this year, and he better if he wants an extension with big bucks. I would also suggest that some of you do some research around the league and look at comparable players. I think you'll find that Willie isn't as bad as some of you think he is.

As I have pointed out, Willie's 3rd year (last year) is comparable, if not slightly better than the great Aaron Gordon's 3rd year in the league. His numbers are better in some areas than Derrick Favors numbers were last season and comparable in others. Maybe were being a bit to harsh on a player that didn't even start playing organized basketball until his junior year of highschool. Compare that to Giles who started playing when he was 6 years old. Just saying!

If you don’t trade him this year he becomes a restricted free agent you don’t match. Hopefully next year we have promising players in 4 out of 5 spots and can sign a free agent or two to take the next step.

 

[John Galt]

For what it's worth, while entertaining wild trade scenarios on Twitter regarding Embiid, Carmichael Dave is saying that WCS "is almost assuredly gone next year."

I wish he's get a job in his beloved Philly I'm so sick of hearing about the process and Hinkie. His envy of Philly is just as bad as some Kings staffers drooling over the Warriors.

I would not want to throw the kitchen sink at Embiid either... and for CD to disparage Hield as a "25 year old bench player" is pretty lame. Sometimes really wonder what side he's on

 

[beb0p]

For reference, Julius Randle's wingspan was also questioned when he entered the draft.

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/1/2/5258332/julius-randle-nba-draft-prospect-2013

Bagley will probably not be a big time shotblocker, but to me he is certainly the 2nd best player in this draft with Doncic a very close third. He brings a lot to the table once you look pass the shotblocking.
.

 

[bajaden]

I think you can think WCS should be traded without being a hater.

The Kings will have Giles, Bagley/Ayton, WCS, Skal, Koufos, and ZBo on the roster.

If you assume Giles is the better player, based on practice, and Bagely/Ayton based on draft position then who else do you keep?

Koufos has a size and strength and a willingness to be a good bench guy that I would keep for certain matchups.

Skal has the potential to spread the floor and could be the best shooting big on the team.

Willie seems most redundant to the first two and the least likely to be a willing bench player. For those reasons, I would be open to trade offers but wouldn’t dump him for a bag of chips.

After next season both Koufos and Randolph will be gone. Neither has a long term future on this team. That would leave us with our draft pick of either Ayton, Jackson, Bagley or Bamba, if we decide to go big man. So lets say Bagley for the sake of argument. We would also have Willie, Giles, and Skal, with Skal being the most unproven player. I'm sorry, but right now, Willie is a far better player than Skal. But even if we include Skal, that's four bigs on the team, which most teams carry.

Then there's also the possibility that we draft either Doncic or Porter, in which we would be left with only Giles, Willie and Skal after next season. By the way, I never used the word Hater in any of my posts, so don't put words in my mouth. Having a disagreement over a players value doesn't make you or anyone else a hater. Might make you wrong though!

 

[bajaden]

I wish he's get a job in his beloved Philly I'm so sick of hearing about the process and Hinkie. His envy of Philly is just as bad as some Kings staffers drooling over the Warriors.

I would not want to throw the kitchen sink at Embiid either... and for CD to disparage Hield as a "25 year old bench player" is pretty lame. Sometimes really wonder what side he's on

To be honest, I think he's trolling on twitter. He knows that Philly isn't going to trade Embiid, and he knows, or should know that Buddy is more than just a bench player. I'm starting to wonder what the hell Dave is smoking.

 

[sactowndog]

After next season both Koufos and Randolph will be gone. Neither has a long term future on this team. That would leave us with our draft pick of either Ayton, Jackson, Bagley or Bamba, if we decide to go big man. So lets say Bagley for the sake of argument. We would also have Willie, Giles, and Skal, with Skal being the most unproven player. I'm sorry, but right now, Willie is a far better player than Skal. But even if we include Skal, that's four bigs on the team, which most teams carry.

Then there's also the possibility that we draft either Doncic or Porter, in which we would be left with only Giles, Willie and Skal after next season. By the way, I never used the word Hater in any of my posts, so don't put words in my mouth. Having a disagreement over a players value doesn't make you or anyone else a hater. Might make you wrong though!

I wasn’t saying you called anyone a hater. Merely you can think WCS is redundant without disliking him as a player. Of course that is particularly if we draft Bagley.

I think we may keep Koufos. He brings qualities others don’t have.

 

[bajaden]

If you don’t trade him this year he becomes a restricted free agent you don’t match. Hopefully next year we have promising players in 4 out of 5 spots and can sign a free agent or two to take the next step.

So, let him become a restricted freeagent. Let him test the market and see what he's worth. According to some on this forum, he's worthless, so matching should be easy, right? If he doesn't have any value on the freeagent market, then how would he have any trade value? I don't know about you, or how you feel, but I think some on this forum have never liked Willie from the moment we drafted him. He wasn't their choice, so failure is the only acceptable outcome to them.

I honestly believe that Willie could start putting up 20 plus points and 10 boards a game, and they would still be complaining about something he didn't do and want him traded. By the way, I'm not opposed to trading Willie. I'm not opposed to trading anyone on the team if the price is right. But I'm not about to just give away a player as a throw in on a trade. Especially one that happens at the moment to be a starter on the team.

 

[LPKingsFan]

For reference, Julius Randle's wingspan was also questioned when he entered the draft.

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/1/2/5258332/julius-randle-nba-draft-prospect-2013

Bagley will probably not be a big time shotblocker, but to me he is certainly the 2nd best player in this draft with Doncic a very close third. He brings a lot to the table once you look pass the shotblocking.
.

Interesting find re: Randle. I think Tjarks just about nailed it in that piece:

That doesn't mean Randle won't be able to score at the next level. Even without great length, he's got a massive frame, a high motor and a nose for the ball. However, he will have to diversify his offense to thrive. In college, he mostly bullies power forwards who can't match up with him physically. In the NBA, he will have to be a better shooter and he will need to use his right hand. No matter where he is on the floor, he always goes back to his left. It's funny when you start watching for it.

The real concerns are on the other end of the floor. Randle averages 0.1 steals and 0.7 blocks, awful for a big man with his athleticism. Kevin Pelton of ESPN Insider has found that block and steal rates in college are important tools when projecting big men prospects. I suspect that's because they capture the problems players with comparatively short arms can have.

Here's Zach Lowe in March, and the same themes regarding Randle's fit remain true:

Without a jump shot or a fearsome wingspan, Randle is something of an NBA antique. He might top out now as an elite backup center. He can be more if he balances his game, and hones his jumper and hoops IQ at least a little.

I'm not sure if you were posting that piece to support a claim that the pre-draft conerns about Randle were invalid, but if you were, I would disagree. Randle has still carved out a decent niche in the league, but I think folks would be disappointed if we took Bagley at 2 and he ended up with a Randle-like impact. I think you'd want to see a Blake Griffin-like impact. Luckily, Bagley's athleticism is more like Griffin than Randle.

Edit to add the following PS: TIL that Tjarks has Bagley #5 on his big board, behind ... Miles Bridges!

 

[bajaden]

I wasn’t saying you called anyone a hater. Merely you can think WCS is redundant without disliking him as a player. Of course that is particularly if we draft Bagley.

I think we may keep Koufos. He brings qualities others don’t have.

Just so you know, I really like Koufos, and if the Kings wanted to keep him as an insurance policy of sorts, I'd be on board with that. I happen to think that Willie has value and is capable of playing both center and PF. He's a prototype of what the league is going to. seven footers with his athleticism are very difficult to find, and I'm not ready to give up on him just yet. As I said, if no progress after next season, then I'd certainly be looking for a trade partner.

What befuddles me is that people are excited about the idea of signing Gordon to a max contract, but at the same time, dislike Willie, when Willie put up similar to better numbers than Gordon, other than ppg. And the only reason Gordon scored more ppg is because he took more shots. He didn't become more efficient. So excuse me if I have a hard time figuring out why anyone would want an athletic player who has a 45% career fgp and a 30% career 3pp. Willie who gets knocked for not blocking enough shots, is a better shot blocker than Gordon. Willie is a better passer than Gordon, and Willie's per 36 minutes rebounds are better than Gordon's as are his 100 possessions.

Willie: Rebounds per 36 min = 9.0, per 100 possessions = 12.6
Gordon: Rebounds per 36 min = 8.6, per 100 possessions = 11.7

Please, someone explain to me how Gordon needs us to give him a max contract, and Willie needs to be traded.

 

[bajaden]

Interesting find re: Randle. I think Tjarks just about nailed it in that piece:



Here's Zach Lowe in March, and the same themes regarding Randle's fit remain true:



I'm not sure if you were posting that piece to support a claim that the pre-draft conerns about Randle were invalid, but if you were, I would disagree. Randle has still carved out a decent niche in the league, but I think folks would be disappointed if we took Bagley at 2 and he ended up with a Randle-like impact. I think you'd want to see a Blake Griffin-like impact. Luckily, Bagley's athleticism is more like Griffin than Randle.

Actually, there are a lot of similarities between Griffin and Bagley. Different body types, but other than that, similar games in the same time period. Griffin wasn't much of jump shooter, and he was a worse free throw shooter than Bagley shooting 58% in his two years at Oklahoma. Bagley is at least in the mid 60's. Griffin didn't take many three's his sophmore year, but shot 37% while Bagley also didn't take many three's, and shot 38%. Both players lived to rebound, and scored almost all of their points at the basket.

So it's easy to see similar career paths for both of them. I think Bagley is better athlete than Griffin, but obviously Griffin is a much stronger athlete. I said earlier in the college season that the only thing separating Bagley from stardom is a good jumpshot. I still believe that. If you have to guard him away from the basket, he becomes a deadly player with his quickness.

 

[ESP47]

WCS is a center, not a PF. How many good teams out there have WCS type players at PF? None. It doesn't work and it never will.

There is no comparison between him and Aaron Gordon. Two completely different types of players that have different body types and play different positions.

 

[BigVirg]

Just listened to the Carmichael Dave show and he had Scott Pollard on this morning. Dave asked him who the Kings should take at 2 and he immediately said Marvin Bagley. "Best player in this draft" as he would put it. A couple other things he mentioned was that he would take Bamba over Ayton, stating Ayton is a finished product and feels he's about as good as he's going to get but Bamba has legit size and room to develop. Lastly, when asked who he would stay away from he mentioned MPJ and Luka because he hasn't seen anything but highlight reels on them. Interesting take from Scott. I've always respected his analysis on draft prospects and the more and more i think about it the more and more I'm falling in love with Bagley. Full Disclosure, I'm a MPJ fan boy but even I have to admit there is legit risk to drafting him at 2. Bagley seems more and more like the safest pick and biggest upside. Imagine the athleticism of Bagley and Giles at the 4 and 5. Another factor is that this FA class is heavier at the SF position so we could potentially fill out our roster easier if we go Bagley. Lastly my case for Bagley, if we believe Giles is the passer everyone is saying then we don't need another ball dominant player like Ayton or Luka. We already have fox and bogdan and how jaegar runs the offense through the high post it would seem like thats Giles' spot. A real rim runner with crazy scoring efficiency and plenty of room to develop defensively and shooting ability could be just what we need. That's my case, feel free to pick me apart!