KINGS PICKING 4TH IN 2022 NBA DRAFT!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
They are all within one rung of the ladder with Ham though. I'm not saying all are great, even Dave I disagree with as often as I agree with him. But the big thing is none of them really carry the baggage Ham does. Well ok, I'll never not laugh at Matt George for the Double Down rap. 
Some of the KF.com members have had personal experiences with James Ham that paint him in a negative light. @Warhawk summarized his experience here. But there's also a general attitude that we're all Kings fans, we're all here dedicating our time to following the team and discussing NBA basketball as a community, and having a bigger platform doesn't grant you any special authority or intelligence -- especially if you're willing to screw over people in the community to get it.
At the end of the day, it's really this. Unless you have a legit source in the org, you are us. I think Ham at one time did, I think that in the current Kings, they aren't leaking to local reporters, if anyone. In fact they already got burned because someone leaked the Bogi deal. I do think Ham likes to pretend that he still has special info but at this point I am pretty sure he's just a hobby guy with a platform.
It's also "straight up speculation" that he does have any quality inside sources at this point. He doesn't break any news and just comes swinging by with a "I can confirm" now and then. He confirms, and it's always after the fact.
As long as we are speculating, let's speculate based on the facts in front of us. How long he's been working is immaterial if it doesn't yield any results.
As long as we are speculating, let's speculate based on the facts in front of us. How long he's been working is immaterial if it doesn't yield any results.
The entire media relations crew for the Kings left at the end of the season aside from the intern and the leakiest leaker in the organization left to take a job with the league. Also the most outspoken minority owners who happened to keep leaking info to the media also got bought out at the beginning of the last season.
Monte runs an exceptionally tight ship (especially compared to the Vlade era) to the point that he’s been refusing to give out the names of some of the guys they’re bringing in for draft workouts.
I’m not trying to single out Ham with this post at all but the guys covering this team are simply just not going to have quality information like the bigger national media guys with connections to agents and league execs do. Heck, the only time Ham has broken anything of note over the last several years was the time DDV’s agent spoonfed him talking points to try to boost Donte’s contract value.
That’s just the way the media game goes nowadays and it just seems important to acknowledge that the guys covering this Kings team at the moment are probably less informed than some of the members of this board who have actually been around this Kings organization longer than all the media guys have.
Monte runs an exceptionally tight ship (especially compared to the Vlade era) to the point that he’s been refusing to give out the names of some of the guys they’re bringing in for draft workouts.
I’m not trying to single out Ham with this post at all but the guys covering this team are simply just not going to have quality information like the bigger national media guys with connections to agents and league execs do. Heck, the only time Ham has broken anything of note over the last several years was the time DDV’s agent spoonfed him talking points to try to boost Donte’s contract value.
That’s just the way the media game goes nowadays and it just seems important to acknowledge that the guys covering this Kings team at the moment are probably less informed than some of the members of this board who have actually been around this Kings organization longer than all the media guys have.
this while being neat, is just calculating a bunch of mocks to give an overall picture of where everyone is being drafted?
the most interesting things to me here are that Banchero is the true wildcard as obviously more than a few mocks have him #1 even though this person's weighted average has him a clear #3. And Sharpe. Total speculation but it feels like Sharpe has either fallen drastically or he has a promise way ahead of predictions.
the most interesting things to me here are that Banchero is the true wildcard as obviously more than a few mocks have him #1 even though this person's weighted average has him a clear #3. And Sharpe. Total speculation but it feels like Sharpe has either fallen drastically or he has a promise way ahead of predictions.
Are you basing this off of the consensus mock here, or on other info? It seems like a consensus 5 isn't really all that far from what I would have expected for Sharpe - the top three big men have been consensus 1/2/3 since...always, and while Sharpe obviously developed some hype in the last few months I'm not sure he ever got anything resembling a consensus he would break into the top 3.
I think perhaps Kings fans see the Sharpe/Ivey question different than the national consensus because Ivey is a poor fit for our team as currently constructed, and Sharpe less so. So, national consensus has Ivey at #4, with Sharpe at #5 perhaps not so much because everybody is convinced by Ivey, but because the info on Sharpe is so sparse. But Kings fans, seeing a poor fit with Ivey, may be a bit more open to projecting their hopes onto Sharpe than the average national observer.
I think perhaps Kings fans see the Sharpe/Ivey question different than the national consensus because Ivey is a poor fit for our team as currently constructed, and Sharpe less so. So, national consensus has Ivey at #4, with Sharpe at #5 perhaps not so much because everybody is convinced by Ivey, but because the info on Sharpe is so sparse. But Kings fans, seeing a poor fit with Ivey, may be a bit more open to projecting their hopes onto Sharpe than the average national observer.
I mean what are the odds that nearly every mock has Jaden Ivey at 4? I find it hard to believe that all these writers watched at least a dozen full games involving all these players and watched them closely enough to be able to rank them 1-30, while nearly all of them just so happen to have Ivey nestled in perfectly at 4. Seems like a mock or two come out and everyone kind of copies those and then they make tweaks along the way.
I only watched about four full Purdue games and I was very impressed with Ivey in one of those games and he didn't impress me much at all in the other three except for a flash play here and there. I can squint and see him with some Ja Morant scoring potential but I don't see the playmaking or defensive abilities to make him anything more than a poor man's Fox.
I only watched about four full Purdue games and I was very impressed with Ivey in one of those games and he didn't impress me much at all in the other three except for a flash play here and there. I can squint and see him with some Ja Morant scoring potential but I don't see the playmaking or defensive abilities to make him anything more than a poor man's Fox.
In one way this is closer to the way things worked in the time before social media. Being first matters on Twitter but you can't print a newspaper with two sentence "articles" and call it a day nor would writing such an article make you a journalist. What local media used to provide wasn't really in the moment breaking news but rather in-depth looks at a personal story or developing storylines researched over several days and supported by first-hand observations and quotes. Unfortunately what we have now is an over-emphasis on immediate reactions and a relative void where the measured and researched coverage used to be.
While I don't think the team has an obligation to reveal details about in-progress negotiations which should remain private, I also don't think it's a positive development if the only coverage available is from the perspective of the team's own PR department. This is one of those gray areas where the market has adjusted and there's no longer an advertising sponsored budget for actual journalism nor is there any financial incentive for the teams to open themselves up to independent media anymore.
The mock draft consensus chart you posted is a great example. I could make my own chart in about 5 minutes by collecting the numbers from a dozen different mock draft pages, dumping them into a spreadsheet, and running a couple of averaging functions. But what does that really show other than online data is so easily accessible that the entire artifice has become an echo chamber and what appears to be a diversity of opinions is mostly just the same information being regurgitated from different locations. If all of these websites had a month to put together their own prospect rankings independently with no access to each other and then we compared them we might actually learn something. But that type of analysis has become virtually impossible.
While I don't think the team has an obligation to reveal details about in-progress negotiations which should remain private, I also don't think it's a positive development if the only coverage available is from the perspective of the team's own PR department. This is one of those gray areas where the market has adjusted and there's no longer an advertising sponsored budget for actual journalism nor is there any financial incentive for the teams to open themselves up to independent media anymore.
The mock draft consensus chart you posted is a great example. I could make my own chart in about 5 minutes by collecting the numbers from a dozen different mock draft pages, dumping them into a spreadsheet, and running a couple of averaging functions. But what does that really show other than online data is so easily accessible that the entire artifice has become an echo chamber and what appears to be a diversity of opinions is mostly just the same information being regurgitated from different locations. If all of these websites had a month to put together their own prospect rankings independently with no access to each other and then we compared them we might actually learn something. But that type of analysis has become virtually impossible.
I'm saying that when Sharpe announced until the combine there was all kinds of hype on him being 4 or even making his way into the top 3 but now he is just nestled in comfortably at 5. But the buzz on him has fallen off a bit, and word out of the combine was some folks had cooled. But the weighted number is still over half a pick higher than the mean so I wonder what's going on that the mocks he is placing higher value on are moving him up not down.
But as for my speculation on Sharpe - he doesn't seem to be making much effort to move up based on reports post combine, which to me either means someone has told him they are picking him or he is hiding with the hope he doesn't fall beyond 5.
But as for my speculation on Sharpe - he doesn't seem to be making much effort to move up based on reports post combine, which to me either means someone has told him they are picking him or he is hiding with the hope he doesn't fall beyond 5.
The mocks I find most interesting are when they have team experts picking for the team, not one or two guys picking their BPA in order or adding their biases like "LOL KANGZ DRAFT GUARD AGAIN".
And to that end they should give their #1 choice from the whole pool (within reason) plus their pick of who is available in the mock.
And to that end they should give their #1 choice from the whole pool (within reason) plus their pick of who is available in the mock.
Until reliable leaks start coming out of the org, I don't think it's speculating to say they've been patched/dried up. There has been a thorough housecleaning over the last 18 months. It's also a fact that Ham's current gig isn't as close to the org as his old one but he isn't particularly transparent about it since he still uses the "Kings Insider" moniker from the Comcast RSN even though he is now unaffiliated. I think it's fair to laugh about it until we actually get some inside dirt.
I've been trying hard to sell myself on Keegan Murray, but I'm not sure that I can. I know he's the fan favorite to be drafted at #4, and might be Monte's too. But could anyone give me some solid counter-pointer's against my worries? I'd love to alleviate some of the fears I have with him.
His strengths as a post-up scorer won't show up in Sacramento because Fox and Sabonis' guys will just double and triple team. Murray hardly passes out once he starts getting in his motion. It's a bit of a lose-lose situation.
With that part of his game being negated, what do we have left with Murray? A good 3&D PF who plays very hard on both ends. Is that type of player worth the #4 overall pick for our team? That's the part I'm stuck at.
- Fit with Fox and Sabonis on offense
- 1:02, he'd have his brother wide open if he elected to pass it before he started going into his motion
- 1:21, he tries to take the ball in transition with 4 guys around him, #30 or #2 should've saw the ball
- 1:29, he forces the TO and has a 2 on 1 in transition and has his teammate leaking in front, but he decides to take it himself against 2 defenders
- 2:32, he was double-teamed, and should've passed it to #0
- 4:33, he grabs the offensive rebound, and has 2 wide open teammates, but decides to put the ball up with all 5 defenders around him
His strengths as a post-up scorer won't show up in Sacramento because Fox and Sabonis' guys will just double and triple team. Murray hardly passes out once he starts getting in his motion. It's a bit of a lose-lose situation.
With that part of his game being negated, what do we have left with Murray? A good 3&D PF who plays very hard on both ends. Is that type of player worth the #4 overall pick for our team? That's the part I'm stuck at.
On offense, he would fit only if he's camped in the corner like how Horford is used with the Celts. So, yea, you're right. Given Fox's and Domas' strengths, he'd be a jump shooting role player. He's not going to be able to get you a ton of offensive boards either, given where he'll be on the court.
On defense, people are projecting him as someone, who can operate as a small ball 5. A small ball 5 like a young Horford would be worth the #4 pick. I think he's a 4/3 tweener, who won't be able to defend elite 3s and who won't be able to bang with 5s. He's solid, but at 4, nah.
On defense, people are projecting him as someone, who can operate as a small ball 5. A small ball 5 like a young Horford would be worth the #4 pick. I think he's a 4/3 tweener, who won't be able to defend elite 3s and who won't be able to bang with 5s. He's solid, but at 4, nah.
IMO, Ivey doesn't seem like a point guard to me. Much more Dwayne Wade than Ja Morant. He's an attacking guard, not a facilitator. I'm not against drafting Ivey, but I think it is pretty clear that he would be a shooting guard, rather than a PG in the league. IMO, trying to make him a PG would be a mistake.
- Status