The thing for me about Sengun is, with the obvious conceit that he is still really young and has a small chance of being the next Jokic, I’m not sure he provides that much more value at nine than, say, Petrusev at 39.
Detroit tanked.. the only difference is that they were actually bad unlike the Thunder who sat Al Horford and SGA for most of the back half of the season when they realized they were going to be too good to land in the top five.
And that still didn’t work.
Funny, but they haven't had #9 since 1984. And got a pretty darn good player with that pick in Otis Thorpe. My favorite KING for the first few seasons after they moved to town.
I'd be happy with lightning striking twice.
The lottery pick they've historically been cursed with is #7. They've owned it SIX times.
They've also held 5, 6 and 8 three times each.
So of the 25 lotteries the KINGS have participated in (retaining their own pick) today marks 15 lotteries selecting in the 5-8 range. 60% of the time.
Detroit tanked.. the only difference is that they were actually bad unlike the Thunder who sat Al Horford and SGA for most of the back half of the season when they realized they were going to be too good to land in the top five.
And that still didn’t work.
I remember that was when I still watched, we had a huge first half lead on them and it collapsed with a monster comeback I think they were up 10 and then with 2 minutes left, it evaporated. They made bad in bounds plays and even threw up some free throws that looked like Kevin Durant trying to force a second OT of a Game 7.
In terms of skillset Johnson is a good fit for the current NBA as a playmaking 4. But the difference between him being a rotation player and a star are (1) developing his outside shot and (2) his mental makeup.
There's obvious evidence to critique the first and circumstantial evidence to worry about the second.
I was a big fan of Johnson coming into this year and was disappointed at how his season ended at Duke. But if McNair were to gamble on him at #9 I wouldn't be disappointed by that choice.
I remember that was when I still watched, we had a huge first half lead on them and it collapsed with a monster comeback I think they were up 10 and then with 2 minutes left, it evaporated. They made bad in bounds plays and even threw up some free throws that looked like Kevin Durant trying to force a second OT of a Game 7.
In summary (jump to page 7ish) they came back from 17 points down only to cede the lead back in the closing minutes and intentionally miss free throws in a two point game with time on the clock on at least two occasions.
I'm not a draft expert and don't watch college basketball as broadly as I once did -- but I do like Cunningham's game and potential fit with Fox and Haliburton.
I'd be willing to give up a lot. Just not Fox or Hali.
HOU can have Buddy, Bagley (or substitute any other players they could want besides Fox and Hali) and #9.
In summary (jump to page 7ish) they came back from 17 points down only to cede the lead back in the closing minutes and intentionally miss free throws in a two point game with time on the clock on at least two occasions.
I'm not a draft expert and don't watch college basketball as broadly as I once did -- but I do like Cunningham's game and potential fit with Fox and Haliburton.
I'd be willing to give up a lot. Just not Fox or Hali.
HOU can have Buddy, Bagley (or substitute any other players they could want besides Fox and Hali) and #9.
Except that literally happens in every lottery. Every player has something they need to work on. Most people are very high on Barnes, hell I like him too, but he's basically Ben Simmons on offense. If you wanted a player that didn't have a question mark in their game you would be picking top 5.