Kings draft Spencer Hawes: Discussion

[hrdboild]

i really get the feeling that if this guy wasn't white people would be drooling all over him. not that im accusing anyone of racism or anything, it might even be natural considering that people are used to seeing their dominant lane presence as big black men (webber, shaq, garnett, duncan, etc) and simply jump to conclusions based on their immediate reactions to what a player looks like and the secondhand crap they hear from an espn analyst, which 9 times out of 10 is not based on any sort of intellegent analysis (even if said analyst happens to get lucky and turns out to be right).

so im gonna trust geoff on this one because anyone who has watched the kings in the past decade or so has seen what an amazing eye for talent he has, and that he knows how to make talent fit together. the kings from 2001-2003 fielded some of the most well-assembled and complementary teams i have personally seen assembled, so ill take the opinion of the man who designed those teams over the panicked reactions of fans who are afraid of white big men.

Maybe that's true for some people, but I couldn't care less. I think Joel Pryzbilla would help us. Robert Swift has limited upside and now some injury concerns, but he would help us too. I think Tiago Splitter would help us. That guy Portland drafted last year Joel Freeland (who they probabably would trade for nothing right now, btw, considering their new frontline of Oden, Aldridge, Pryzbilla, and Frye) could help us. It's not about Spencer Hawes being white, that's just an easy stereotype for some people to play off of. It's about what he brings to the table for this team.

I should add that I don't have anything against Spencer Hawes personally. He would have been a great fit in Chicago where they already have the defense in place to cover for his deficincies. He has different politics than I do, but whatever. Doesn't mean I can't root for him on a basketball court. But when you already have problems with defense, rebounding, and athleticism in your frontcourt -- when you already have a bunch of one-dimensional scorers -- I don't think adding another one (even if he can hit a hook shot with both hands) is going to change the character of this team in any significant way. It's just more of the same, and that's not good enough.

 

[captain bill]

Bogut is taller and stronger. Ilgauskas was bigger. Miller was good but then he lost whatever athleticism he had. Vlade had size+more height. Bird wasn't unathletic at all. Hawes is a lot closer to Araujo than he is to those guys.

right, i agree with all that. i was just pointing out that the only common denominator between the guys listed was that they were tall and white, so why not include tall white successful guys too?

thinking about this, the chris mihm comparison probably makes sense as a worst case scenario, but i actually think he strongly resembles dirk coming into the league, a young 7 footer with a great offensive game but lacking in athleticism, and certainly not totally prepared for the league. dirk was able to work hard, get his offense going, and eventually become a better rebounder, but never really a great defender- although, in the right system, he has been part of a great defensive team.

is that an extreme case? yeah. but that's exactly why 7 footers with potential are so exciting, especially when they are young and have a great work ethic. hawes, it should be emphasized, is a project at this point and is still developing, but we have to look forward to understand why he was drafted. i said this earlier and no one has really taken it into account, that this pick was designed to pay off a few years down the line, not this season.

i agree that he could be another chris mihm, but let's be honest, he could also be something special, or maybe just somewhere in between. which is exactly why it is actually exciting to see someone like this drafted, instead of an acie law type player where you pretty much know what youre going to get- an nba starter, a valuable commodity, but nothing to build a team around.

legit starting centers are very hard to come by. we may have just found ours for the next 10-15 years, or this may be a bust. but that is why we watch, and that is why we are fans, to support the team and the players and hope for the cinderella story. i have not as of yet read a single post that warrants with reasonable arguments the need for endless pessimism and demands to fire petrie. i have read plenty of reasons to be worried that this guy might work out, but really, no one has refuted the amount of potential this guy has. saying "he cant rebound, he cant defend" (which isnt actually true, hes an average rebounder and set the frosh block record for washington, which means that he might not be ben wallace but he can defend) and ignoring all the great things he brings to the table is dishonest and wrong.

 

[nbrans]

^Since when does Dirk lack in athleticism? He's one of the most athletic seven footers the league has ever seen!

 

[captain bill]

I should add that I don't have anything against Spencer Hawes personally. He would have been a great fit in Chicago where they already have the defense in place to cover for his deficincies. He has different politics than I do, but whatever. Doesn't mean I can't root for him on a basketball court. But when you already have problems with defense, rebounding, and athleticism in your frontcourt -- when you already have a bunch of one-dimensional scorers -- I don't think adding another one (even if he can hit a hook shot with both hands) is going to change the character of this team in any significant way. It's just more of the same, and that's not good enough.

which would be a legitimate argument to make if we brought in hawes to compliment sar, thomas and miller. but hawes is 19. by the time he is contributing those players will be gone. justing williams is then only current player we can reasonably assess hawes in relation to, and they actually compliment each other extremely well.

no- hawes will not change the character of this team in any significant way because he's not going to play significant minutes. so- until you start considering the impact of hawes on say, the 08-09 kings or 09-10 kings, then you aren't properly understanding this pick, which is a big reason for a lot of anger around here. fans don't seem to understand or accept the length of a rebuiling process (which is ironic because the same fans are saying we should have been rebuilding earlier while ignoring the long term vision of the current plan).

so in other words i agree with everything you said but still think you are 100% wrong.

 

[captain bill]

^Since when does Dirk lack in athleticism? He's one of the most athletic seven footers the league has ever seen!

sorry, not athleticism, physicality. this year vs gsw showed that. as did every time he stepped on the court with webber. he is not a dominant rebounder or defender but manages to use the athleticism he has as a finesse player rather than a banger, which is the best-case model for a player like hawes.

 

[hrdboild]

I already posted a long explanation for why I think Hawes is wrong for this team going forward so I won't say it all again. It's back there a few pages. The idea of drafting a 19 year old center is to plug him in at your C spot for the next 10 years right? I assume that's the plan. But I don't think a team with Hawes at C and Kevin Martin at SG is ever going to intimidate anybody. Maybe with the right pieces you could challenge for a championship. And in a weak year you might even get one. If we're starting from scratch, I'd be aiming higher. I'd be aiming for dominating the league. I am looking at the 2010, 2011, 2012 Kings. That's why I don't like the pick, not because of 2008.

 

[C Diddy]

Some people seem to forget that the princeton is an offense not a defense. If Petrie wants to re-create a new princeton offense, then let him. Last time I checked, we were one Robert Horry shot from making the finals, and likely winning it all. And that team had just enough defense to get by. Petrie built a team that was competitive and was a legitimate threat to win the west for a period of time. I don't remember people complaining about some of the player's shortcomings when we were winning games in the playoffs.

Last time I checked, in 2001-2002 the Kings were top 3 in rebounds, steals, defensive FG%, and points allowed. That was our best year. We had great defense and great rebounding. Spencer Hawes adds none of those things.

For that talk about the Spurs bigmen and statistics, you forget that as a trio, they are all above-average team defenders and Duncan is the best big man defender in the league. The Kings don't have an interior defender anywhere near Duncan's caiber and no average team defenders inside. Spencer Hawes doesn't address that need.

 

[Henkel]

And that is I think the argument for the pick of Hawes. it should be no surprise by now that I like the pick, and I think it shows a real sign of a rebuild.

This team has no chance of competing the next 2-3 years. There are just too many mismatched parts, bad contracts, and no cap room. No draft pick (save Oden) was going to change that. With that in mind, the goal is to build a team that will be competitive in 2009 (when Miller, KT, Bibby are all off the books).

When you look at the roster- which players are likely to be on the team for the 2009-2010 season. Not KT, not Brad, not Miller, and not Artest, not Reef. Guys that will likely be here- Martin, Garcia, Williams/Price (hopefully), maybe Salmons.

Essentially- if you are looking to build the 2009 roster you have the following starting lineup

C-
PF-
SF- Garcia (if he devlops as many think he will, he will be a solid starter)
SG- Martin
PG-

Then you have Salmons, Williams, and Price as bench role players. So if the goal is to build for 2009 you draft pieces that you will need in 2009, not pieces you need in 2007. So if you think we have no need for Hawes because of Miller, that might be true in 2007, but not in 2009. Plus, that gives Hawes three years of grooming to be ready.

If the 2009 roster includes Salmons and Garcia (with a starter quality Garcia) there is NO REASON to take Julian Wright. You are just amassing a glut of one position for the future. If you are Geoff, and you are really building for OUR future, you take the C/PF/PG that has the most likeihood of being a solid starter in 3 years. With his post moves and polish, that might be Hawes. The hope is that by 2009, with a few more lotteries and cap space, you have found the athletic defensive PF to put next to him that we never had for Brad.

The future is very VERY bleak for the next 3 years. Until we get some of these contracts off the book, we have nothign going for us. Trading Brad and KT isn't really an option, and while we have them, I don't think we can be a good team (too much money for declining skills).

I think any GM running our team would have to concede that, and look to start building the team for 2009. I think taking Hawes is a sign of that.

Exactly. This team has so many needs, but looking long term we have some options at the sf position. This team needed to start rebuilding its front line and with our cap situation the best way to do that was through the draft.

 

[captain bill]

I already posted a long explanation for why I think Hawes is wrong for this team going forward so I won't say it all again. It's back there a few pages. The idea of drafting a 19 year old center is to plug him in at your C spot for the next 10 years right? I assume that's the plan. But I don't think a team with Hawes at C and Kevin Martin at SG is ever going to intimidate anybody. Maybe with the right pieces you could challenge for a championship. And in a weak year you might even get one. If we're starting from scratch, I'd be aiming higher. I'd be aiming for dominating the league. I am looking at the 2010, 2011, 2012 Kings. That's why I don't like the pick, not because of 2008.

and as i've explained earlier, if that is the idea, then hawes might make sense in terms of being the perfect center for the princeton, being a smart player who can contribute to a team effort. and yes, hawes could be the center for the next ten years if he lives up to his potential. would you rather find a 30 year old to play center for the next decade? hawes and martin won't be the stars of any team that can contend, but neither were divac or peja and they did just fine on a championship level team. anyone with a cursory knowledge of kings history should recognize the type of quality role players that they guys can be and should remember the importance of quality role players in the championship drives of yesteryear. the kings were never the webber-kings, but the sacramento kings, a fundamentally quality team from top to bottom. getting classy, intelligent, hard working, skilled players from 1-9 is critical to that team. we just added one player. its a shame that we couldnt do more, but petrie was definitely trying.

i mean honestly, look at the skills that this guy brings. think about what he can do for a team 5-6 years away- you know, adding more young guys in the next few drafts, probably lotto in the crowded west- and then go back and look at the draft board, and find me a player who is more skilled and a better fit for the type of team that petrie wants to assemble- a team he has proven can perform at an elite level. and then explain to me why picking spencer hawes is a bad idea for a team trying to rebuild, not panicked or on the fly like the last 2 years, but in a slow, methodical way. because really i think this is the first move we've seen that is a clear sign that the kings are fully rebuilding and no longer committed to the failed miller-artest-bibby project. and that should make fans hopeful and optimistic, that petrie is going back to basics, rather than panicked and demanding another band aid to put on this ship that is already sitting at the bottom of the ocean.

 

[Greg Ostertag]

Collison had 6.9 rebounds in 22 minutes his freshman year. Hawes had 6.4 in 28.9. That's a really big difference. That's 12.5 rebounds per/40 for Collison and 8.9 for Hawes.

I like how you leave out the fact he averaged 6.7rpg in 27mpg as a sophomore. Still better than Hawes, yes, but my point was merely the fact that rebounding can be improved upon.

 

[allrightythen]

I find it interesting that some people compare him to Mihm, Kaman, Ostertag, Divac, Miller, etc... Is now really the time to be upset because he seems like these players (whether good or bad). He hasn't stepped on the court yet and he is already one of our biggest weaknesses? I won't claim he'll be great, but I won't claim that he'll be a problem either, I think I'll just wait until he plays a few NBA games then start forming opinions.

The one thing that encourages me the most about him is that many of the reports say how hard of a worker he is. The recent knock on Brad Miller is that he doesn't care enough to work on his game. Well apparently this kid does and he already has some talent and size. So for those reasons I'm optomistic that he'll turn himself into a good player if he isn't already.

 

[SacKings384]

^^ If your team was say... Denver... A team full of slashers with no outside shot, and can't hit the three ball which is their main weakness when it comes to good defensive teams who pack the lane. Furthermore, their defense is awful. And then with a relatively high draft pick they chose a guy and they were like...

"This guy is an athlete, he's fast, he can slash to the hoop, is amazingly quick, and can jump out the gym. But the problem is that he has no outside shot, he can't play defense, and he doesn't distribute the ball well."

How do you think Denver fans would feel? "Oh great... Another quick athletic slasher, that can't shoot, can't pass, and can't play defense."

 

[allrightythen]

^^ If your team was say... Denver... A team full of slashers with no outside shot, and can't hit the three ball which is their main weakness when it comes to good defensive teams who pack the lane. Furthermore, their defense is awful. And then with a relatively high draft pick they chose a guy and they were like...

"This guy is an athlete, he's fast, he can slash to the hoop, is amazingly quick, and can jump out the gym. But the problem is that he has no outside shot, he can't play defense, and he doesn't distribute the ball well."

How do you think Denver fans would feel? "Oh great... Another quick athletic slasher, that can't shoot, can't pass, and can't play defense."

I see your point and last year I would have been with you 100%, but this year not so. I think our team is changing and we took the 19-year-old skilled 7-footer to build our team. I don't think Reef/Miller/Thomas are really in our plans anymore so your argument doesn't hold weight like it would have a year ago. Thats just my view on the whole thing and why I'm not as upset as you are over the pick.

 

[AriesMar27]

my only knock on the pick was that he doesnt seem to fit the supposed uptempo style that the team was headed towards... but in reality hawes would be the exact player that we would need against a team like phx or gsw... especially if williams can handle the rebounding and blocking role off the bench....

i wonder if we could get steven hunter from philly... do they really need him at this point?

 

[vfettke]

So why are we drafting another player who can't play defense? Right now we don't have the players to be a good defensive team. So shouldn't we, you know, go acquire some? The #10 pick is potentially one of the best ways for teams to acquire good players. Caron Butler, Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce. (all shooting guards or small forwards by the way) We just brought in another player for 4 years or more who can't play defense. That's not how you get better. (Although looking at the last 5 drafts, it seems like the #10 pick is the kiss of death).

and where would this defensive player come from? another team? and what team wants our crap contracts? furthurmore, what team wants our crap contracts for young guys that are good defenders? we are rebuilding. so we want youngsters, not vets who probably dont want to play on a rebuilding team. so why draft one pretty good defensive player that's available, when we can have a pretty damn good offensive big guy? if we want a defensive team, then why is our best defender gonna be traded? and why do we have guys like Douby, and Martin who can shoot the lights out? it makes more sense to me to build around the youngsters we have, who are better on offense than defense, although with some development, the defense might be pretty decent too. since our younger guys can play offense well, it almost gives us a headstart with the rebuild.

unless we trade some of the younger guys for more defensive minded players, we are an offensive team (in more ways than one)

 

[BawLa]

Last time I checked, in 2001-2002 the Kings were top 3 in rebounds, steals, defensive FG%, and points allowed. That was our best year. We had great defense and great rebounding. Spencer Hawes adds none of those things.

For that talk about the Spurs bigmen and statistics, you forget that as a trio, they are all above-average team defenders and Duncan is the best big man defender in the league. The Kings don't have an interior defender anywhere near Duncan's caiber and no average team defenders inside. Spencer Hawes doesn't address that need.

You mean he didn't add those things at the rate of a Greg Oden type player in his 1 year of college and in high school? Yeah, I know Hawes is not a superstar. But he'll make a nice star. And many people have pointed out that rebounding can be improved based on proper boxing out, team positioning, and going after it. It seems like this kid has drive, and he has a standing 9'2" reach, so I think you might be surprised when he starts grabbing boards left and right. Either way, you have no idea how he is going to rebound in the NBA until you actually see him do it. You can only make generalizations (and hasty ones at that) about his high-school career and 1 year of college. I mean, he is friggin 19 years old. It's not like rookies don't have room to grow or anything.

Look, if you don't like Spencer because of his percieved defensive liabilities, then that is fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I would ask you to question your expectations of a #10 pick.

I didn't expect a superstar from this draft, and I hope you didn't either. I thought that I made it pretty clear that if we want to have the type of production that the Spurs have on a nightly basis, then we are going to need a PF that is a supreme rebounder, and an above average shotblocker. This mystery man won't need to have much of an offensive game because of Spencer. So we might not even need a superstar in our frontcourt, just a set of specialized stars. Not to mention we will need depth off the bench. Hopefully Justin will fill that role.

Say for example, that we had gotten a perfect, rebounding, shotblocking PF with no offensive game at the #10 pick. Great. Then we would need a big man that can score down low. So one way or another, a guy like Hawes is needed. Unless of course if the second coming of Tim Duncan comes out in the draft and we somehow get the #1 pick.

 

[hrdboild]

and where would this defensive player come from? another team? and what team wants our crap contracts? furthurmore, what team wants our crap contracts for young guys that are good defenders? we are rebuilding. so we want youngsters, not vets who probably dont want to play on a rebuilding team. so why draft one pretty good defensive player that's available, when we can have a pretty damn good offensive big guy? if we want a defensive team, then why is our best defender gonna be traded? and why do we have guys like Douby, and Martin who can shoot the lights out? it makes more sense to me to build around the youngsters we have, who are better on offense than defense, although with some development, the defense might be pretty decent too. since our younger guys can play offense well, it almost gives us a headstart with the rebuild.

unless we trade some of the younger guys for more defensive minded players, we are an offensive team (in more ways than one)

a) We could have drafted a defensive player in the draft this year and last year instead of a potential liability at the most important defensive position in basketball and an undersized SG/PG who can't play his position. That's one place those players could have come from. We can also trade our aging shoot-first PG to some team that wants to contend for a young defensive player.

b) I want a defensive team. And the Maloofs keep saying they want a defensive team. I don't think Petrie does, or if he does he doesn't seem to know how to go about it. Hence why I'm discouraged.

c) If Artest gets traded it'll be because of his off the court problems, not on the court. And I'm not in favor of trading him anyway.

d) Martin and Douby were drafted when Petrie thought we were still contending, and he's always seemed to favor offense in his player acquisitions anyway. Not every player on the team has to be a defensive stopper, but at least some of them should be. One guy who plays defense is not going to get it done. And I didn't like the Douby pick either.

e) Why shouldn't we trade some of our younger guys for defensive players? Wouldn't that be a good way to improve our defense?

 

[BreakfastWithYao]

I would eagerly watch a Crossfire-style political roundtable show moderated by Hawes and Artest. I'd like to see them on the court, too. I'm very worried that Hawes won't pan out, but I feel the same way about Noah and don't know enough about the post men that went after pick ten.

 

[vfettke]

a) We could have drafted a defensive player in the draft this year and last year instead of a potential liability at the most important defensive position in basketball and an undersized SG/PG who can't play his position. That's one place those players could have come from. We can also trade our aging shoot-first PG to some team that wants to contend for a young defensive player.

b) I want a defensive team. And the Maloofs keep saying they want a defensive team. I don't think Petrie does, or if he does he doesn't seem to know how to go about it. Hence why I'm discouraged.

c) If Artest gets traded it'll be because of his off the court problems, not on the court. And I'm not in favor of trading him anyway.

d) Martin and Douby were drafted when Petrie thought we were still contending, and he's always seemed to favor offense in his player acquisitions anyway. Not every player on the team has to be a defensive stopper, but at least some of them should be. One guy who plays defense is not going to get it done. And I didn't like the Douby pick either.

e) Why shouldn't we trade some of our younger guys for defensive players? Wouldn't that be a good way to improve our defense?

a) we could have. but what position would they be at? Petrie drafted a damn good center. he might not be a rebounding machine or an amazing shotblocker, but he's not BAD at either of those things. i dont think people realize that. the NBA has longer games, a shorter shot clock, and more possessions. all this leads to more opportunities to block shots and rebound. and all indications are that Hawes works hard and will actually try to block and rebound. Also, we don't trade our "aging shoot-first PG" for a "young defensive player" because no other teams would want to do that. there's only a few teams that would want Bibby. Number 1 is Cleveland. the only young defensive player i can think of is Varejao, who they wouldn't offer in the first place, and definitely won't offer him now

b) I'll let Petrie know that YOU want a defensive team. here's why i'm not discouraged about drafting offensive players. the Maloofs want an offensive team. the Maloofs aren't exactly the best decision makers in regards to basketball. so if Petrie decides not to listen and build an up-tempo offensive team that plays enough defense to get by (like during the glory years) then i'm all for it.

c) Artest wasn't that great on the court either. he was disruptive. he'd hog the ball and try to do his wannabe Kobe shtick and takeover the game. but it'd never work. the only way he should stay is if he realizes that he's a DEFENSIVE player that is our third option on offense behind Martin and Bibby. if he did that, he'd still average a lot of points, plus his shooting percentages would go up since he wouldn't have to force things

d) yeah, i said that already. one guy won't get it done. and that's all we have, is one guy. he might be traded. so we already have a bunch of youngsters who play good offense, which gives us a headstart if we rebuild into an offensive team

e) it would be a great way to improve our defense. but who would it get us? which youngsters are you willing to part with?

another thing no one seems to get is that with our current crop of youngsters such as Martin, Garcia, Douby, Williams, Price, and Hawes our defense actually wouldn't be as bad as some might think. the only problem is that guys like Bibby, Artest, KT, Miller and SAR kinda stand in the way. if we blew it up and got rid of those guys, and gave the young guys a lot of PT to develop, they could turn into a pretty damn good defensive and offensive team

 

[kupman]

This whole discussion takes me back to 1998 when I was living in Dallas. That year, the Mavs drafted Tractor Traylor and everyone was very happy. But then, just a few minutes later they traded Tractor away for the rights to some young, tall guy from Germany that nobody really knew much about.

The media and fans were angry with p*** and vinegar for days, even weeks. There was much talk about the how dumb the Mavs front office was and Don Nelson must be a raving lunatic. It is all kind of funny in hindsight. I am not saying that it will turn out the same way. It is just kind of funny to think about.

 

[uolj]

This whole discussion takes me back to 1998 when I was living in Dallas. That year, the Mavs drafted Tractor Traylor and everyone was very happy. But then, just a few minutes later they traded Tractor away for the rights to some young, tall guy from Germany that nobody really knew much about.

The media and fans were angry with p*** and vinegar for days, even weeks. There was much talk about the how dumb the Mavs front office was and Don Nelson must be a raving lunatic. It is all kind of funny in hindsight. I am not saying that it will turn out the same way. It is just kind of funny to think about.

It seems different to me. That story sounds like when Stojakovic was drafted and most fans wanted John Wallace.

In this case, I think the fans are unhappy not because they know nothing of the player, but because they do know something about the player. Namely that he fails to address probably the two biggest weaknesses the franchise has had over the last several years.

Of course, it still might turn out to be the right pick, but the reason people are upset (or at least the people I pay attention to) is entirely different than in the Nowitzki or Stojakovic scenarios.

 

[VF21]

I think most people are disappointed because they had gotten their hopes up about Yi. I do think there was also some kind of expectation/hope that we'd be able to grab someone who would fully address the team weaknesses.

What I'm seeing is that some people who were really upset at first are now at least willing to wait and see what else happens.

Bottom line? The ones who really care about the Kings will still be here. My thought, for what it's worth, is we're at the very beginning of a long but hopefully steady process of turning the corner and heading back in the right direction.

 

[Rain man]

.
In this case, I think the fans are unhappy not because they know nothing of the player, but because they do know something about the player. Namely that he fails to address probably the two biggest weaknesses the franchise has had over the last several years.

And I think this is the entire problem- sometimes a little bit of knowledge is MUCH MUCH worse than no knowledge at all.

We all (myself included) think we are NBA quality talent evaluators because thanks to the internet and ESPN we have access to information we never had before. But we don't know the full story, we are not in the workouts, and (as much as this might hurt some of you), we don't have the same eye for evaluating talent that most GMs and NBA scouts do.

Fans know just enough about Spencer to dislike him (white, 7 foot, perceived as unathletic) without knowing the full story or EVER having seen him play. And fans are basing their entire opinion on him based on predraft measurements, Chad Ford, the history of white 7 footers, and you tube clips.

I don't have the answers on him either, and he might be a bust; but I am certainly willing to give him a shot before I write him off. Talented 7 footers don't come along everyday...

 

[VF21]

And I think this is the entire problem- sometimes a little bit of knowledge is MUCH MUCH worse than no knowledge at all.

We all (myself included) think we are NBA quality talent evaluators because thanks to the internet and ESPN we have access to information we never had before. But we don't know the full story, we are not in the workouts, and (as much as this might hurt some of you), we don't have the same eye for evaluating talent that most GMs and NBA scouts do.

Fans know just enough about Spencer to dislike him (white, 7 foot, perceived as unathletic) without knowing the full story or EVER having seen him play. And fans are basing their entire opinion on him based on predraft measurements, Chad Ford, the history of white 7 footers, and you tube clips.

I don't have the answers on him either, and he might be a bust; but I am certainly willing to give him a shot before I write him off. Talented 7 footers don't come along everyday...

I think you're mis-stating the situation. MOST people here, at least, who are complaining about Spencer don't dislike him. What they dislike is the selection of him by the Kings. BIG difference.

 

[uolj]

VF21 is right, you're missing the point, Rain man. Hawes himself said he needs to work on his defense and rebounding. Nobody is denying that those aren't his weaknesses.

Petrie drafted him because he felt that skilled centers are hard to come by and he felt Hawes' skills are worth it.

Hopefully you understand that we all agree that he has positive qualities that potentially make him a very good player in the league. That isn't a question (again, at least to the Kings fans who I have been paying attention to).

So I don't see where it is wrong for people to be disappointed that the Kings still haven't added somebody who doesn't need to improve their defense and rebounding? Why shouldn't fans be allowed to feel that way?

 

[Londonking]

we are rebuilding. so we want youngsters, not vets who probably dont want to play on a rebuilding team. so why draft one pretty good defensive player that's available, when we can have a pretty damn good offensive big guy? it makes more sense to me to build around the youngsters we have, who are better on offense than defense, although with some development, the defense might be pretty decent too. since our younger guys can play offense well, it almost gives us a headstart with the rebuild.

Reading through this thread i agree with vfettke's line of thought. We are rebuilding and Hawes is just one of the jigsaw pieces for the future. I havent seen him play - so i cant speak from first hand experience. I will reserve judgement on his potential weaknesses until they cost us results.

Go Kings

 

[Rain man]

I think you're mis-stating the situation. MOST people here, at least, who are complaining about Spencer don't dislike him. What they dislike is the selection of him by the Kings. BIG difference.

Fair enough- and on rereading some of the posts, I think your read is more accurate than mine when I made that post.

Thanks for the clarification

 

[hrdboild]

I think most people are disappointed because they had gotten their hopes up about Yi. I do think there was also some kind of expectation/hope that we'd be able to grab someone who would fully address the team weaknesses.

What I'm seeing is that some people who were really upset at first are now at least willing to wait and see what else happens.

Bottom line? The ones who really care about the Kings will still be here. My thought, for what it's worth, is we're at the very beginning of a long but hopefully steady process of turning the corner and heading back in the right direction.

Yeah, once the initial disappointment fades, I can be a little more reasonable about this. There's no reason to be all negative, all the time. I'm sure Petrie did try to make deals, I'm sure he did deliberate the pros and cons of every player available and make what he thought was the most sensible choice. I don't think it was a terrible move. But I am getting rather tired of seeing other teams rebuild themselves in the draft brilliantly while we sit back and do nothing. This year was worse because, with the team in last place, there was that much longer to anticipate the draft. So you know, like any rabid fan with too much time on their hands I looked at all the scouting reports, watched some college basketball, chose which players I think are going to be future stars. And then after all that it comes down to "I'll be happy with anyone available at #10 except for this guy" and then David Stern walks up to the podium and says "With the number 10 pick (please not Spencer Hawes) in the 2007 NBA draft (anyone but Spencer Hawes) the Sacramento Kings (not Hawes, please not Hawes) select Spen... and I didn't even bother listening to the rest.

But in the few days since, having typed out all the reasons I was against the Hawes pick, the initial disappointment has faded a bit. When Julian Wright and Al Thornton score their first 30 point game that'll hurt a bit, but I can eventually deal with that too. And I'm coming around to some of the positives Hawes can provide. I think we could have done better with our pick and we should have made a move at the trade deadline and we should have been more active last season and the season before, but it is a little unreasonable to expect one lottery pick to make up for all of that, good or bad. He's just one guy on a 12 man roster. I hope he has a long and succesful NBA career, and now that he's a King I hope he has a long and succesful career as a King at that. I'm still skeptical whether he's what this team needs though. And I'm skeptical whether Petrie is capable of the kind of roster overhaul a lot of us are hoping for.

 

[VF21]

Yeah, once the initial disappointment fades, I can be a little more reasonable about this. I'm sure Petrie did try to make deals, I'm sure he did deliberate the pros and cons of every player available and make what he thought was the most sensible choice. I don't think it was a terrible move. But I am getting rather tired of seeing other teams rebuild themselves in the draft brilliantly while we sit back and do nothing. This year was worse because, with the team in last place, there was that much longer to anticipate the draft. So you know, like any rabid fan with too much time on their hands I looked at all the scouting reports, watched some college basketball, chose which players I think are going to be future stars. And then after all that it comes down to "I'll be happy with anyone available at #10 except for this guy" and then David Stern walks up to the podium and says "With the number 10 pick (please not Spencer Hawes) in the 2007 NBA draft (anyone but Spencer Hawes) the Sacramento Kings (not Hawes, please not Hawes) select Spen... and I didn't even bother listening to the rest.

But in the few days since, having typed out all the reasons I was against the Hawes pick, the initial disappointment has faded a bit. When Julian Wright and Al Thornton score their first 30 point game that'll hurt a bit, but I can eventually deal with that too. And I'm coming around to some of the positives Hawes can provide. I think we could have done better with our pick and we should have made a move at the trade deadline and we should have been more active last season and the season before, but it is a little unreasonable to expect one lottery pick to make up for all of that, good or bad. He's just one guy on a 12 man roster. I hope he has a long and succesful NBA career, and now that he's a King I hope he has a long and succesful career as a King at that. I'm still skeptical whether he's what this team needs though. And I'm skeptical whether Petrie is capable of the kind of roster overhaul a lot of us are hoping for.

Nice post, hrdboild. I think we all want the same thing for the team. It just gets frustrating because we really have no say in what happens in this type of stuff. We just have to stand by idly and watch - and that can be really aggravating.

I pouted about us not getting Noah for almost a full day. And Noah wouldn't have been the savior of the team either.

It's all good. We're still Kings fans - even though it's a lot harder than it used to be. I still believe things are gonna get better.

 

[yaboy]

This was the draft that I was hoping the kings would make a move to move up in the lottery. Im really disappointed to see Golden State make another move and get one of the best prospects in draft while we're stuck with what might be just another role player thats weak on defense and rebounding.

Every team is getting better besides us. We just seem to fall short in everything that goes on in the NBA right now. Hopefully Petrie will get things turned around asap because the west just became a lot stronger. I'm starting to lose faith in this organization especially after how they have handled this team over the past few years...