Michael Porter Jr
- Thread starter funkykingston
- Start date
Funky read me right here, but I'll clarify: I agree that Porter's two games at Missouri is far too small of a sample size (AND not a fully healthy sample size) to make any conclusions about his basketball ability or how he will translate to the NBA or whether we should take him at #2 (a question on which I am decidedly undecided). But it's not too small of a sample size to say that during those two games he was out of shape.
And based on him being out of shape, I don't think he had been "ready to play" for a long time. I think he had been "wanting to play" for a long time - and full kudos for the desire to be on a basketball court! - but I don't think his body had been ready for a long time (as those whispers would suggest) by any means.
And based on him being out of shape, I don't think he had been "ready to play" for a long time. I think he had been "wanting to play" for a long time - and full kudos for the desire to be on a basketball court! - but I don't think his body had been ready for a long time (as those whispers would suggest) by any means.
They may have had back surgery, but I was searching for the same micro-disectomy back surgery that MPJ did.
I could only find Dwight Howard as an NBA player, but there were other types of athletes like Tiger Woods and Gronk that had the same procedure.
Edit: I did a little more digging. Vlade had his back sugery in 2005, when he went back to the Lakers. He was a lot older, 37 years old, but the back injury essentially ended his career.
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jan/06/sports/sp-lakerep6
Corliss had his back surgery right before the Kings picked him in 1995. He says that it took a couple of years to regain his form, he finally had "breakout" year in 1997-98. Corliss had a solid, but unspectacular career.
http://www.searcyliving.net/au08/corliss.html
I could only find Dwight Howard as an NBA player, but there were other types of athletes like Tiger Woods and Gronk that had the same procedure.
Edit: I did a little more digging. Vlade had his back sugery in 2005, when he went back to the Lakers. He was a lot older, 37 years old, but the back injury essentially ended his career.
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jan/06/sports/sp-lakerep6
Corliss had his back surgery right before the Kings picked him in 1995. He says that it took a couple of years to regain his form, he finally had "breakout" year in 1997-98. Corliss had a solid, but unspectacular career.
http://www.searcyliving.net/au08/corliss.html
Last edited:
In this specific case, this specific conversation, there wasn't any nitpicking of Porter's college minutes. If you read it that way, it was because that was what you expected to see, not what was written. I said that Porter being out of shape for his college minutes suggested he hadn't been "ready" to play for a long time, which doesn't comport with the rumors you mentioned. That's all. That's it. Nothing more.
Come on. If those last two games were of Porter "ready to play", then no way am I drafting him #2.
For MPJ's sake and whoever winds up drafting him, let's hope he did rush back to play and wasn't ready to play.
A heroic effort to help his teammates because they needed him is a lot better narrative for him than being fully ready and playing like crap for those last 2 games.
I think MPJ has said so himself that he wasn't fully ready to play for those games, I think he said he was around 70%.
For MPJ's sake and whoever winds up drafting him, let's hope he did rush back to play and wasn't ready to play.
A heroic effort to help his teammates because they needed him is a lot better narrative for him than being fully ready and playing like crap for those last 2 games.
I think MPJ has said so himself that he wasn't fully ready to play for those games, I think he said he was around 70%.
Last edited:
This is true every year, but it's probably more like 95% of Kings fans that haven't watched more than 1 game of the top 10 prospects. You're already talking about 20 full games just to meet that minimum standard of credibility. That's a huge time commitment even if you can track down all those games... many of them are really only accessible if you're watching live and then you have to check the schedules regularly throughout the year and there's no college basketball schedule that's automatically sortable by "NBA draft prospect". Even if you know who is playing and when, watching those games live might not be practical for various reasons.
That's why we see these swells... somebody starts talking up a prospect and then the Kings are mentioned as being interested and suddenly a ton of fans have a reason to believe in that player. I saw that happen with Cauley-Stein, I saw it happen with Jimmer Fredette and Nik Stauskas. This whole amateur scout thing really took off with Youtube. Before that there just wasn't anything to watch unless you were a dedicated enthusiast with a lot of time on your hands or special connections. Now I can google any of the draft eligible players and pull up a 5 minute edit of some of their best moments. We're totally at the mercy of the person putting those highlight reels together though and they can be incredibly misleading. Most of them just ignore defense entirely and they generally don't show you how many shots a player missed or if they looked off an open teammate before making that crazy difficult horse shot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad YouTube is there. If you look hard enough it's possible to find whole games there and even some scout oriented clips which are actually fair and unbiased. And it's helpful to remind yourself of what you saw months ago by pulling up the single game highlights and box score. But I'm also well aware that much of the buzz generated by fans is media driven rather than firsthand takes on actual game footage and that's fine. There's no rule that you need to spend hours and hours of your life watching amateur basketball to have an opinion. I expect the front office folks are doing their due diligence anyway and that's what we should expect. Whether the fans are excited on draft day or irate doesn't really matter. All that matters in the end is whether the team makes the right pick or not. This is all just something to talk about while we wait.
That's why we see these swells... somebody starts talking up a prospect and then the Kings are mentioned as being interested and suddenly a ton of fans have a reason to believe in that player. I saw that happen with Cauley-Stein, I saw it happen with Jimmer Fredette and Nik Stauskas. This whole amateur scout thing really took off with Youtube. Before that there just wasn't anything to watch unless you were a dedicated enthusiast with a lot of time on your hands or special connections. Now I can google any of the draft eligible players and pull up a 5 minute edit of some of their best moments. We're totally at the mercy of the person putting those highlight reels together though and they can be incredibly misleading. Most of them just ignore defense entirely and they generally don't show you how many shots a player missed or if they looked off an open teammate before making that crazy difficult horse shot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad YouTube is there. If you look hard enough it's possible to find whole games there and even some scout oriented clips which are actually fair and unbiased. And it's helpful to remind yourself of what you saw months ago by pulling up the single game highlights and box score. But I'm also well aware that much of the buzz generated by fans is media driven rather than firsthand takes on actual game footage and that's fine. There's no rule that you need to spend hours and hours of your life watching amateur basketball to have an opinion. I expect the front office folks are doing their due diligence anyway and that's what we should expect. Whether the fans are excited on draft day or irate doesn't really matter. All that matters in the end is whether the team makes the right pick or not. This is all just something to talk about while we wait.
Thats all well and good but it doesn’t make teams pick who the teams talk up. Thinking that is fallacy.
Philly didn’t trade up for Fultz because Boston reportedly liked him. They traded up because they believed that Fultz fits their core better than other of the top 3 players.
Teams with the position of strength will talk up players to see what they can get from the teams that would trade up.
If Dallas is talking up Porter, the Kings sure as hell will not pick Porter because Mavs reportedly like him. They will pick him because they think he is the best prospect available at our pick.
Philly didn’t trade up for Fultz because Boston reportedly liked him. They traded up because they believed that Fultz fits their core better than other of the top 3 players.
Teams with the position of strength will talk up players to see what they can get from the teams that would trade up.
If Dallas is talking up Porter, the Kings sure as hell will not pick Porter because Mavs reportedly like him. They will pick him because they think he is the best prospect available at our pick.
It's really hard to apply much from either case to Porter Jr. Vlade was at the end of his career and Corliss was a very different player than MPJ.
The study I read was that athletes who undergo a microdisectomy have better long term results than those who go down non-surgical routes. But even so, it generally takes a full year after surgery to return to form. Given Porter Jr's age and that he's carrying relatively little weight compared to his frame, he might have a shorter recovery time. Who knows?
Summer league will be really interesting for him. He's exactly the player who should shine in that sort of unstructured environment but at the same time he's coming off injury and hasn't played meaningful basketball really since high school.
The study I read was that athletes who undergo a microdisectomy have better long term results than those who go down non-surgical routes. But even so, it generally takes a full year after surgery to return to form. Given Porter Jr's age and that he's carrying relatively little weight compared to his frame, he might have a shorter recovery time. Who knows?
Summer league will be really interesting for him. He's exactly the player who should shine in that sort of unstructured environment but at the same time he's coming off injury and hasn't played meaningful basketball really since high school.
Yes, this is true. But Philly did trade up because they believed that Boston really coveted Fultz, so they felt the need to give up a very valuable asset (ours or the Lakers future 1st rounder) to make sure that Boston would give up the player they thought Boston "coveted".
The moment that trade was completed, Danny Ainge proclaimed that the player they really coveted will still be there at #3 (Tatum).
If Philly knew Tatum was Boston's pick all along and LA was taking Ball, there was no reason to give up our 1st round pick to move up. Boston wouldn't risk losing Tatum by trading down any further than #3, they would had just picked Tatum #1.
The general consensus at the time was that Magic Johnson wanted Lonzo Ball. If Philly did not bite on Boston's perception that they wanted Fultz at #1, they could had stayed at #3 and possibly gotten Fultz without giving up a possible future top 3 overall pick.
The reverse could be said too. A team wanting to grab a player projected to be taken out of their range or right at their range would not want to highly tout a player to the media that they want to slide to them. Either they stay quite or they try to pump up other players.
It's not to say that Memphis doesn't like or wouldn't take MPJ if he was avaiable to them at #4 and their real target was already gone. I'm sure after the draft, they will just say whoever they drafted was their target all along (kinda like the Kings saying Fox was their target, but we may never really know).
But in general, I don't think teams that are not in a position of power, have any advantage of announcing who they really want, since they don't have control if that player will be available when they pick.
The moment that trade was completed, Danny Ainge proclaimed that the player they really coveted will still be there at #3 (Tatum).
If Philly knew Tatum was Boston's pick all along and LA was taking Ball, there was no reason to give up our 1st round pick to move up. Boston wouldn't risk losing Tatum by trading down any further than #3, they would had just picked Tatum #1.
The general consensus at the time was that Magic Johnson wanted Lonzo Ball. If Philly did not bite on Boston's perception that they wanted Fultz at #1, they could had stayed at #3 and possibly gotten Fultz without giving up a possible future top 3 overall pick.
The reverse could be said too. A team wanting to grab a player projected to be taken out of their range or right at their range would not want to highly tout a player to the media that they want to slide to them. Either they stay quite or they try to pump up other players.
It's not to say that Memphis doesn't like or wouldn't take MPJ if he was avaiable to them at #4 and their real target was already gone. I'm sure after the draft, they will just say whoever they drafted was their target all along (kinda like the Kings saying Fox was their target, but we may never really know).
But in general, I don't think teams that are not in a position of power, have any advantage of announcing who they really want, since they don't have control if that player will be available when they pick.
Last edited:
Grant is useless when it comes to talking about the Kings. All he does is say that 99% of topics aren't even worth talking about when someone calls in. Weird that a sports radio host spends more time talking about how pointless sports topics are than actually talking about sports topics. Now if it's talking trash about Cousins or talking about New York sports, then he's all for it.
I just found it funny that they had some Missouri local reporter on the show the other day who knew nothing more than any of us who have read a couple of articles on Porter.
I just found it funny that they had some Missouri local reporter on the show the other day who knew nothing more than any of us who have read a couple of articles on Porter.
The first part of your post is spot on. Philly were tricked into trading up. I never said that sort of thing doesn’t happen. Boston played their cards right there.
Your second point of teams talking up other prospects so that their guy falls to the, is real fallacy. Do you really think that franchises that invest millions of dollars into their scouting departments would then pick a player because teams below them like that player?! Seriously!!! Its like saying Suns will pick Porter because Mavs, Kings and Chicago like him. It’s not going to happen.
Kings are not going to pick Porter because Mavs and other teams like him. Kings are in position of strength here and they will pick who they think is best for them. Not the player that teams below them like. Hawks are not going to pick Bamba because teams below them really like him. They will pick the player they like the most.
Now teams might want to keep it on the quiet on who they like because they might see it as not wanting to disclose part of their IP but I can guarantee you no team is going to pick a player early because teams picking behind them like the player. There might be some tactics like that if the team has two picks relatively close together so they might pick player x first because a couple of teams behind them have strong interest in the player and the player won’t last to next pick.
If Kings do pick a player because the team picking behind them like him, the shut down the whole thing and distinguish the franchise. Don’t deserve to have one. That’s now how multi million dollar scouting departments work. Not in the modern day and age where everything is so advanced.
Your second point of teams talking up other prospects so that their guy falls to the, is real fallacy. Do you really think that franchises that invest millions of dollars into their scouting departments would then pick a player because teams below them like that player?! Seriously!!! Its like saying Suns will pick Porter because Mavs, Kings and Chicago like him. It’s not going to happen.
Kings are not going to pick Porter because Mavs and other teams like him. Kings are in position of strength here and they will pick who they think is best for them. Not the player that teams below them like. Hawks are not going to pick Bamba because teams below them really like him. They will pick the player they like the most.
Now teams might want to keep it on the quiet on who they like because they might see it as not wanting to disclose part of their IP but I can guarantee you no team is going to pick a player early because teams picking behind them like the player. There might be some tactics like that if the team has two picks relatively close together so they might pick player x first because a couple of teams behind them have strong interest in the player and the player won’t last to next pick.
If Kings do pick a player because the team picking behind them like him, the shut down the whole thing and distinguish the franchise. Don’t deserve to have one. That’s now how multi million dollar scouting departments work. Not in the modern day and age where everything is so advanced.
One element of the poker game you didn't mention... Philly could have believed that SOMEONE ELSE would trade up into the first two picks and take Fultz. So if you are Philly and you really believe Fultz is your guy, you don't want to have somebody deal with LAL and snatch him from you. With all Lavar's "Lakers or bust" talk, it seems quite feasible that the Lakers could have slid down a little and still got him - or that some other team would ship the goods to Boston to take Fultz.
This is the game that Chicago Bears played with Mitch Trubisky... they knew SF was not going to take him - but they didn't know who else might be out there looking to trade up for him.
This is the game that Chicago Bears played with Mitch Trubisky... they knew SF was not going to take him - but they didn't know who else might be out there looking to trade up for him.
You are correct that the Kings would not pick a player because the teams picking behind them want him.
But, if a team like the Grizzlies picking #4 wants Doncic to fall to them and they know the Kings are interested in MPJ, but the Kings want to trade down to do it, the Grizzlies may put out "sources" stating they love MPJ, to scare the Kings into keeping their pick at #2 to take MPJ. Then Atlanta at #3 takes Bagley as expected and Doncic falls to Memphis at #4, without having to give up anything.
Otherwise, the Kings may ponder making a trade to say Dallas for a #2 and #5 swap, with Dallas taking Doncic #2 and the Kings landing MPJ at #5. But if Memphis puts out "sources" that they would take MPJ at #4, then the Kings won't risk losing MPJ and we just take MPJ at #2.
Smokescreens also can work for the Kings too, even at #2. If the Kings target is really Doncic, but they are worried that someone may try to trade up to #1 to draft him before they can get him. They put out "sources" that they are unconvinced by him. By not showing your hand, the Kings also lessen the chances that someone may try to trade up to #1 to take the Kings real target before they pick.
Smokescreens are not necessarily to make another team pick a certain player, but it can also prevent other teams from making certain trades or moves that would cause your real target to be picked before you can.
But, if a team like the Grizzlies picking #4 wants Doncic to fall to them and they know the Kings are interested in MPJ, but the Kings want to trade down to do it, the Grizzlies may put out "sources" stating they love MPJ, to scare the Kings into keeping their pick at #2 to take MPJ. Then Atlanta at #3 takes Bagley as expected and Doncic falls to Memphis at #4, without having to give up anything.
Otherwise, the Kings may ponder making a trade to say Dallas for a #2 and #5 swap, with Dallas taking Doncic #2 and the Kings landing MPJ at #5. But if Memphis puts out "sources" that they would take MPJ at #4, then the Kings won't risk losing MPJ and we just take MPJ at #2.
Smokescreens also can work for the Kings too, even at #2. If the Kings target is really Doncic, but they are worried that someone may try to trade up to #1 to draft him before they can get him. They put out "sources" that they are unconvinced by him. By not showing your hand, the Kings also lessen the chances that someone may try to trade up to #1 to take the Kings real target before they pick.
Smokescreens are not necessarily to make another team pick a certain player, but it can also prevent other teams from making certain trades or moves that would cause your real target to be picked before you can.
Last edited:
NEWS BULLETIN: On Friday in Chicago the Sacramento Kings' back specialist will evaluate the imaging and all the tests previously done, and give Porter his own inspection. Then either Kings go with him, or not, on that basis. They will know after this weekend whether they go with Porter. So says Napier as I type. Sacramento will not trade down to get him. They either think he's healthy, or he's not. And if they think he's healthy, it sounds 99.9% sure that they pick him #2. The specialist may not release findings until he has chance to review, maybe a day or so later; not exactly sure on that.
Napier believes that Kings pick Bagley or Doncic if Porter is not given a clean bill of health.
Napier believes that Kings pick Bagley or Doncic if Porter is not given a clean bill of health.
Why would the announcer of the Kings, a team employee, outright tell the rest of the teams who the Kings are picking? I don't think this organization is THAT STUPID. Then again the stupidity of this organization never ceases to amaze me. Im gonna assume everything out there right now is smokescreen. If the Kings were really that high on MPJ they would make every effort to say the opposite to try and get assets in a trade down while still getting "their guy".
I wouldn't be happy with that selection.
I would however give Porter the benefit of the doubt and see what kind of player he turns out to be.
But whether it's Porter or someone else - if the Kings draft a player who ends up being a bust or disappointment while guys taken after #2 turn into stars, I'm going to take a break from this team for a while. With no 2019 pick and no franchise player to build on this really is the best shot this team will have for a while to significantly improve. They really can't screw it up.
And I freely admit that I could be wrong, but drafting Porter Jr sure seems to me like screwing it up.
I would however give Porter the benefit of the doubt and see what kind of player he turns out to be.
But whether it's Porter or someone else - if the Kings draft a player who ends up being a bust or disappointment while guys taken after #2 turn into stars, I'm going to take a break from this team for a while. With no 2019 pick and no franchise player to build on this really is the best shot this team will have for a while to significantly improve. They really can't screw it up.
And I freely admit that I could be wrong, but drafting Porter Jr sure seems to me like screwing it up.