Kings Select in the 2008 NBA DRAFT??
- Thread starter =LarryLegend=
- Start date
Sorry, I only mentioned Hibbert as a player that could slide down the chart. I do think he will be better than Curry only because he seems to have more desire. He is not my first choice however.
I hope some of you watched the Washington, Stanford game tonight. If you did, you'll know why I'm so high on Brook Lopez. He is the consumate team player, until his team is down by 12 or 14 points and nothing seems to be working. He then simply takes over a game. He was just unstopable in the second half of the game. Washington had no answer for him, and beleive me they tried. He will remind a lot of people of Duncan with his bank shots. I predict stardom for this guy. Too bad that we have no chance at him...
I hope some of you watched the Washington, Stanford game tonight. If you did, you'll know why I'm so high on Brook Lopez. He is the consumate team player, until his team is down by 12 or 14 points and nothing seems to be working. He then simply takes over a game. He was just unstopable in the second half of the game. Washington had no answer for him, and beleive me they tried. He will remind a lot of people of Duncan with his bank shots. I predict stardom for this guy. Too bad that we have no chance at him...
No. He probably won't be available at our pick, but if he was, we should pick the best guy for our roster, unless the difference is huge. BPA only works if you're prepared to promptly trade away pieces you drafted who you don't need. The last time we did anything resembling that was Hedo Turkoglu, and he didn't get a fantastic deal out of it. The time before when we did that predated Petrie.
In other words, the whole justification for BPA is broken with Geoff. Geoff's interpretation of BPA means Douby on the bench, or Gerald Wallace taking a walk.
Screw BPA.
In other words, the whole justification for BPA is broken with Geoff. Geoff's interpretation of BPA means Douby on the bench, or Gerald Wallace taking a walk.
Screw BPA.
Well, he may not be exactly a team player (and it was Washington State, not Washington 
) but Brook definitely showed his star potential tonight. There was nothing the Cougars could do to stop him. He simply took over. The Duncan comparisons are apt in terms of skillset, but I'd hesitate to predict Duncan-level production from Brook at the next level. Let's see what he can do in the Pac-10s and the NCAA Tournament, first!
) but Brook definitely showed his star potential tonight. There was nothing the Cougars could do to stop him. He simply took over. The Duncan comparisons are apt in terms of skillset, but I'd hesitate to predict Duncan-level production from Brook at the next level. Let's see what he can do in the Pac-10s and the NCAA Tournament, first! 
Yah caught that game.. Don't think Lopez will be on our list though because he will be drafted either 3rd or 4th depending on who get the 3rd pick.
A guy that has REALLY impressed me is Ryan Anderson in tonights game against Wash (Washington vs. Cal). Another guy who is playing kickass BBall.. Would 100% definitely with out a doubt for sure draft him above Hardin. (although Hardin had a great game himself tonight)
But Lopez is the type of player that you would move Hawes to the 4 and play Lopez at 5 (or other way around). Lopez is about as sure as a sure thing can get.
The above brings another question.. If Hardin is available in the early second round do we give him a tryout?
Last edited:
Ryan Anderson is so underrated it's ridiculous. Besides being a bit weak for the 4 i don't see why he isn't projected to go in the first half of the draft. He also strike me as a player Petrie would be attracted to because of his versatility and offensive skills. There could be some pretty solid pf available for the Kings even with a late lotto pick.
Batum is better compared to Shawn Marion. not as good as a defender, but could be. very long. good hops, the problem i have with Batum is he gets lost in the offense a lot. he doesn't have that nastiness.
A Ron Artest-less kings team lacks nastiness, i think garcia has it, but thats it. if ron opts out i would miss that. notice people haven't been driving on us as much. i guess Mikki moore has a little bit too, see GW.
i think Batum falls we pull trigger. i do see either kings drafting dj, or a European pt guard. i dont have a problem with a 2nd on Sean singletary.
also i would pick Nathan Jawai at 42.
A Ron Artest-less kings team lacks nastiness, i think garcia has it, but thats it. if ron opts out i would miss that. notice people haven't been driving on us as much. i guess Mikki moore has a little bit too, see GW.
i think Batum falls we pull trigger. i do see either kings drafting dj, or a European pt guard. i dont have a problem with a 2nd on Sean singletary.
also i would pick Nathan Jawai at 42.
Again, your logic is flawed. We are not a contending team now like we were when we took Wallace. We have alot of needs, not just one. A rookie is not going to come in and play straight away, I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. Therefore we take the BPA at a position of need. I find it hard to comprehend why you feel SF isn't a future need of the team. This is the 12th pick, not the 23rd (or whatever it was) like when we took Douby.
As an aside, I'm really growing on Thompson. He seems like a very good prospect. My only problem is that I'm not sure he's worth the 12th pick. If we could nab a 2nd 1st rounder and get him, I'd be very happy. Also another note, the Kings had scouts at one of his games recently (as did the Cavs). Good length, athleticism, developing a decent array of post moves and uses his body very well to pull down almost 12 rebounds in under 35 mins, along with 3 blocks per. Another worry is the lower level of competition, although he has played well against big players such as Beasley.
As an aside, I'm really growing on Thompson. He seems like a very good prospect. My only problem is that I'm not sure he's worth the 12th pick. If we could nab a 2nd 1st rounder and get him, I'd be very happy. Also another note, the Kings had scouts at one of his games recently (as did the Cavs). Good length, athleticism, developing a decent array of post moves and uses his body very well to pull down almost 12 rebounds in under 35 mins, along with 3 blocks per. Another worry is the lower level of competition, although he has played well against big players such as Beasley.
Well, he may not be exactly a team player (and it was Washington State, not Washington ) but Brook definitely showed his star potential tonight. There was nothing the Cougars could do to stop him. He simply took over. The Duncan comparisons are apt in terms of skillset, but I'd hesitate to predict Duncan-level production from Brook at the next level. Let's see what he can do in the Pac-10s and the NCAA Tournament, first!
) but Brook definitely showed his star potential tonight. There was nothing the Cougars could do to stop him. He simply took over. The Duncan comparisons are apt in terms of skillset, but I'd hesitate to predict Duncan-level production from Brook at the next level. Let's see what he can do in the Pac-10s and the NCAA Tournament, first!
By the way, I mentioned Ryan Anderson a few weeks ago. I think he's going to be a pretty good player at the next level, and yes I would take him over Hardin.
As far as being a reach for Thompson at number 12, how many players have been taken in the lower rounds that if the draft was done over would be a top 5 or top 10 pick. If you think he's the guy, you take him. Besides, by the time the draft rolls around I suspect he going to move up the draft board.
As far as being a reach for Thompson at number 12, how many players have been taken in the lower rounds that if the draft was done over would be a top 5 or top 10 pick. If you think he's the guy, you take him. Besides, by the time the draft rolls around I suspect he going to move up the draft board.
I don't see any refuted logic on either side of this discussion, we're just operating under different assumptions. And we're not going to get any closer to agreement very soon, so you can consider me done with the Batum topic (or that of any other SG or SF) for the next few months.
I don't think we should draft a SF in the first round, you think we should draft Batum, end of story.
I don't think we should draft a SF in the first round, you think we should draft Batum, end of story.
See the UCLA game today yall??
Again Love impressed the hell out of me in how many times he touches the ball in a game compared to how few turnovers. Scoring in the post is amazing, passing out of the post was amazing. He could have had 8-10 assists if they hit their open jumpers (he only ended up having one). Love's defense wasn't there today, but he more than made up for it on the offensive end. Jordan Hill had one hell of a game against him..
Another thing I noticed more so today is his boxing out ability. I knew it was REAL good, but he went up against a REAL good rebounder today in Hill, and he dominated even though Hill is supposedly 2 inches taller, and more athletic. 15 rebounds to 6, and Love had 4 offensive rebounds.
Hear them talking about Love being a legit 6'9 now? Supposedly the kid has grown almost an inch this year. I guess we will see at the combine.
After todays game I am definitely hoping the Kings draft Love. Every game I have seen him in this year (about 9-11 games this year) he has been dominant on the boards, and in the low post. That's what we need for our PF spot. He is just so damn consistent against elite competition in the PAC-10
Again Love impressed the hell out of me in how many times he touches the ball in a game compared to how few turnovers. Scoring in the post is amazing, passing out of the post was amazing. He could have had 8-10 assists if they hit their open jumpers (he only ended up having one). Love's defense wasn't there today, but he more than made up for it on the offensive end. Jordan Hill had one hell of a game against him..
Another thing I noticed more so today is his boxing out ability. I knew it was REAL good, but he went up against a REAL good rebounder today in Hill, and he dominated even though Hill is supposedly 2 inches taller, and more athletic. 15 rebounds to 6, and Love had 4 offensive rebounds.
Hear them talking about Love being a legit 6'9 now? Supposedly the kid has grown almost an inch this year. I guess we will see at the combine.
After todays game I am definitely hoping the Kings draft Love. Every game I have seen him in this year (about 9-11 games this year) he has been dominant on the boards, and in the low post. That's what we need for our PF spot. He is just so damn consistent against elite competition in the PAC-10
See the UCLA game today yall??
Again Love impressed the hell out of me in how many times he touches the ball in a game compared to how few turnovers. Scoring in the post is amazing, passing out of the post was amazing. He could have had 8-10 assists if they hit their open jumpers (he only ended up having one). Love's defense wasn't there today, but he more than made up for it on the offensive end. Jordan Hill had one hell of a game against him..
Another thing I noticed more so today is his boxing out ability. I knew it was REAL good, but he went up against a REAL good rebounder today in Hill, and he dominated even though Hill is supposedly 2 inches taller, and more athletic. 15 rebounds to 6, and Love had 4 offensive rebounds.
Hear them talking about Love being a legit 6'9 now? Supposedly the kid has grown almost an inch this year. I guess we will see at the combine.
After todays game I am definitely hoping the Kings draft Love. Every game I have seen him in this year (about 9-11 games this year) he has been dominant on the boards, and in the low post. That's what we need for our PF spot. He is just so damn consistent against elite competition in the PAC-10
Again Love impressed the hell out of me in how many times he touches the ball in a game compared to how few turnovers. Scoring in the post is amazing, passing out of the post was amazing. He could have had 8-10 assists if they hit their open jumpers (he only ended up having one). Love's defense wasn't there today, but he more than made up for it on the offensive end. Jordan Hill had one hell of a game against him..
Another thing I noticed more so today is his boxing out ability. I knew it was REAL good, but he went up against a REAL good rebounder today in Hill, and he dominated even though Hill is supposedly 2 inches taller, and more athletic. 15 rebounds to 6, and Love had 4 offensive rebounds.
Hear them talking about Love being a legit 6'9 now? Supposedly the kid has grown almost an inch this year. I guess we will see at the combine.
After todays game I am definitely hoping the Kings draft Love. Every game I have seen him in this year (about 9-11 games this year) he has been dominant on the boards, and in the low post. That's what we need for our PF spot. He is just so damn consistent against elite competition in the PAC-10
Love is earth-bound, not that tall.... he's just not an NBA prospect, not a promising one anyway.
Supposedly he is a legit 6'9 now.. But anyhow, He was great on the glass, great post moves, good eye for the ball, great passing ability, great ball control (how often he handled the ball and only had 3 to's - one was not his fault).. I dunno why people can't see the same thing I see. It's like you are reading it from a draft site, and repeating it over and over, and I am actually watching him play.
Reason I say that is because you called Thabeet "graceful" with the ball which almost made me ruin my keyboard. Graceful and Thabeet should never be used in the same sentence. the reason he doesn't get the ball much is because about half of his average points scored per game come from putbacks. He might have one offensive play called for him which consists of "get position down low, and I will pass the ball to you for a dunk". Seriously. Which games are you watching if any at all? Reason I ask is because it's like we are watching two separate things... Love was dominant today. He went up against another good prospect today in Jordan Hill who is a good rebounder, and Love had almost as many offensive rebounds as Hill had total.
I follow college BBall very close, and watch pretty much every game that comes on, and if there are two on at a time I go back and forth pausing during commercials. I am a college BBall junkie... Not saying Thabeet doesn't have some skills, but compared to Love, Love is twice the basketball player Thabeet is at the moment.. There are reasons Thabeet is ranked so high on the sites but a large part of that is that horrible "P" word..
But Hill didn't give Love fits. Love outrebounded him, as has been pointed out, and Hill's scoring was largely on uncontested dunks - which were the fault of the defensive rotation and not Love. In the first half, the play was: Arizona player drives, Love rotates over to cut off the drive, nobody rotates over to cover Hill, Hill gets the pass for the uncontested dunk. Not exactly Love's fault, and a pattern that didn't continue after halftime. It's not like Hill was continually putting up nasty post moves and getting around Love, or consistently boxing him out.
I also watched the game. I think I've seen every televised game that Love has been in. Some people see what they want to see. There's no doubt that Love will be a good NBA player. How good? We'll see. Is he at this time better than Thabeet? Absoutely, and anyone who can't see that simply doesn't know basketball.
I will also say this. Anyone who says that Thabeet is graceful with the ball simply hasn't seen him play and is reading crap on NBA draft net. I sometimes wonder if anyone on that site has seen him play. Has Thabeet improved from last year? Yes, but thats not saying a lot. I'll be curious to see how many times he gets called for a 3 second violation in the NBA. Right now, I'm just not a big fan of his, but if we end up drafting him, I hope your all right and that I'm wrong.
I will also say this. Anyone who says that Thabeet is graceful with the ball simply hasn't seen him play and is reading crap on NBA draft net. I sometimes wonder if anyone on that site has seen him play. Has Thabeet improved from last year? Yes, but thats not saying a lot. I'll be curious to see how many times he gets called for a 3 second violation in the NBA. Right now, I'm just not a big fan of his, but if we end up drafting him, I hope your all right and that I'm wrong.
The thing is, there are skills that work great in college, and there are skills that work great in the NBA. There are players who are awesome in college (think Madsen, Adam Morrison, Trajon Langdon, Michael Bradley, all the way back to Big Country Reeves), who flop in the pros. That's because if you're skilled in college you can be a good, even dominant player in the NCAA. But in the NBA you have to be athletic, and if you're a power forward smaller than 6'10" or a center smaller than 7'0" you have to be REALLY athletic.
Love looked like a really good college player on Sunday, and most other days he plays. Most of the time he's the biggest and strongest guy on the floor, he has good hands and is good at getting rebounds. I saw what you saw in that respect -- a big who was cleaning up.
But when you're looking at how someone's skills are going to translate to the NBA, here's what I see: someone who is definitely not 6'10" and probably isn't even 6'9". A guy who is earthbound and can't jump at all, and who isn't quick by any stretch of the imagination. Who isn't a great man defender or shotblocker.
The skills that Love excels at (rebounding, shooting) aren't going to be available to him in the pros, when he's not the biggest guy on the floor and he's going up against guys who are bigger than him and more athletic than him.
In college you can get away with slow and skilled, in fact you can be quite good. In the NBA these guys get killed. Mark Madsen, Michael Bradley, Araujo, Haislip... I mean, these guys were all awesome in college and they were major flops in the NBA because they just weren't athletic enough.
Now, take Thabeet. The reason I'm so high on him is that the skills that he has will translate even BETTER in the NBA than they do in college. In college he's playing with guys who don't get him the ball (and I've seen him be quite good at getting the ball up and in when he gets it in the post), he's guarding guys who are much smaller and quicker than him and so he's often in foul trouble (which wouldn't happen as he's going up against real centers in the NBA), and the things he excels at (shotblocking, rebounding) WILL be available to him in the NBA because he has NBA size and athleticism.
If you're judging just on game impact at the college level -- yeah, Love is more dominating. Thabeet is still a project. But if given the choice, I'll take the guy who has elite NBA level athleticism over a guy who doesn't. There's always a place for guys who have great size and athleticism for their position. Not so much guys who are "skilled" and unathletic.
Love looked like a really good college player on Sunday, and most other days he plays. Most of the time he's the biggest and strongest guy on the floor, he has good hands and is good at getting rebounds. I saw what you saw in that respect -- a big who was cleaning up.
But when you're looking at how someone's skills are going to translate to the NBA, here's what I see: someone who is definitely not 6'10" and probably isn't even 6'9". A guy who is earthbound and can't jump at all, and who isn't quick by any stretch of the imagination. Who isn't a great man defender or shotblocker.
The skills that Love excels at (rebounding, shooting) aren't going to be available to him in the pros, when he's not the biggest guy on the floor and he's going up against guys who are bigger than him and more athletic than him.
In college you can get away with slow and skilled, in fact you can be quite good. In the NBA these guys get killed. Mark Madsen, Michael Bradley, Araujo, Haislip... I mean, these guys were all awesome in college and they were major flops in the NBA because they just weren't athletic enough.
Now, take Thabeet. The reason I'm so high on him is that the skills that he has will translate even BETTER in the NBA than they do in college. In college he's playing with guys who don't get him the ball (and I've seen him be quite good at getting the ball up and in when he gets it in the post), he's guarding guys who are much smaller and quicker than him and so he's often in foul trouble (which wouldn't happen as he's going up against real centers in the NBA), and the things he excels at (shotblocking, rebounding) WILL be available to him in the NBA because he has NBA size and athleticism.
If you're judging just on game impact at the college level -- yeah, Love is more dominating. Thabeet is still a project. But if given the choice, I'll take the guy who has elite NBA level athleticism over a guy who doesn't. There's always a place for guys who have great size and athleticism for their position. Not so much guys who are "skilled" and unathletic.
Draft net express scouting report
This isn't the whole report. Too long. Just some of the pertinent parts.
Once taken out of his comfort zone offensively, (meaning catching and finishing for the most part), Thabeet’s inexperience as a basketball player really comes out. His footwork is poor, and he’s fairly slow and mechanical trying to create any type of offense for himself if he needs to make a real move. He also lacks a left hand or any type of counter moves, often just throwing the ball up on the rim with poor touch, hoping it drops. He clearly lacks core strength and especially balance here, falling over on the floor quite easily and looking somewhat fragile in general if forced to react to something unexpected out on the court. He’s also an extremely poor passer, currently tied for having the second worst assist rate in the country amongst all players in our database, and also ranking near the bottom in assist to turnover ratio. Considering the lack of polish he shows on the offensive end, it’s not a stretch to say that he’s probably never going to be much of an option here in the NBA.
Defensively, though, Thabeet’s potential as a game-changer inside the paint is hard to ignore. He has excellent timing for blocked shots, and has started get better at keeping the ball in-bounds after a block. His mere presence in the paint is a huge deterrence for opposing teams at this level, as he’s not only 7-3, but also exceptionally long, and capable of getting off his feet. He makes a big impact in the paint as far as team defense goes, ranking 7th in the country in blocks per-40 minutes pace adjusted.
As a man to man defender, Thabeet leaves something to be desired still. Skilled back to the basket centers (a rare commodity in the NCAA) have proven to be very effective against him, as he gets pushed around and posted up quite easily, not looking to fight back that much, standing too upright, giving up excessive space, and not moving his feet very well to stay with them. He does a very poor job in particular of stepping out onto the perimeter to hedge a screen or defend a big man who is capable of facing the basket, showing poor awareness in space and looking fairly lost in the process. Nowhere was that more evident than in the Georgetown game a few weeks ago, where Thabeet lost his man Roy Hibbert completely and thus gave him a great deal of time to set his feet and knock down the game winning 3-pointer from behind the arc. Big matchups in general have been a problem for Thabeet over the last two years, as every time he faces a team with anything even resembling an NBA caliber big man, he struggles badly.
Rebounding-wise, you’d probably expect Thabeet to make more of an impact than he currently does considering his awesome physical tools. He in fact ranks just 47th of the 56 NCAA centers that are in our database in this category per 40 minutes pace adjusted, despite standing 7-3. His poor hands are most evident in this part of his game, as are his lack of fundamentals--boxing out his man lackadaisically, and going after rebounds with just one hand. He’ll often take himself out of position for rebounds by chasing blocked shots excessively, which further hurts him in this category.
Another problem here is that Thabeet doesn’t seem to be the most active player in the world, rarely going out of his area for rebounds, and not really showing the type of fire and passion you see out of players who just want the ball more than their opponents. At times you get the feeling that Thabeet is not going 100%, as he’ll look sleepy, distant, and not involved in what’s going on on the floor. There have been question marks raised constantly regarding his motor, work ethic and love for the game, which is a huge concern considering how far off he is at the moment from reaching his full potential, and how much individual work he’ll have to put in to get there.
With that said, Thabeet seems to be making some clear strides as a player this year, and obviously has a lot more room to grow. He’ll be tempted to enter the draft this year already and possibly cash in on being selected somewhere in the first round, but would clearly benefit long-term from being patient and spending another year in college under Coach Calhoun, who has a sparkling reputation for developing NBA big men.
[Read Full Article]
I agree with most of this article which is fair. He may well develop into a very good player, but has a ways to go. I also dislike when critics start to question desire.
This isn't the whole report. Too long. Just some of the pertinent parts.
Once taken out of his comfort zone offensively, (meaning catching and finishing for the most part), Thabeet’s inexperience as a basketball player really comes out. His footwork is poor, and he’s fairly slow and mechanical trying to create any type of offense for himself if he needs to make a real move. He also lacks a left hand or any type of counter moves, often just throwing the ball up on the rim with poor touch, hoping it drops. He clearly lacks core strength and especially balance here, falling over on the floor quite easily and looking somewhat fragile in general if forced to react to something unexpected out on the court. He’s also an extremely poor passer, currently tied for having the second worst assist rate in the country amongst all players in our database, and also ranking near the bottom in assist to turnover ratio. Considering the lack of polish he shows on the offensive end, it’s not a stretch to say that he’s probably never going to be much of an option here in the NBA.
Defensively, though, Thabeet’s potential as a game-changer inside the paint is hard to ignore. He has excellent timing for blocked shots, and has started get better at keeping the ball in-bounds after a block. His mere presence in the paint is a huge deterrence for opposing teams at this level, as he’s not only 7-3, but also exceptionally long, and capable of getting off his feet. He makes a big impact in the paint as far as team defense goes, ranking 7th in the country in blocks per-40 minutes pace adjusted.
As a man to man defender, Thabeet leaves something to be desired still. Skilled back to the basket centers (a rare commodity in the NCAA) have proven to be very effective against him, as he gets pushed around and posted up quite easily, not looking to fight back that much, standing too upright, giving up excessive space, and not moving his feet very well to stay with them. He does a very poor job in particular of stepping out onto the perimeter to hedge a screen or defend a big man who is capable of facing the basket, showing poor awareness in space and looking fairly lost in the process. Nowhere was that more evident than in the Georgetown game a few weeks ago, where Thabeet lost his man Roy Hibbert completely and thus gave him a great deal of time to set his feet and knock down the game winning 3-pointer from behind the arc. Big matchups in general have been a problem for Thabeet over the last two years, as every time he faces a team with anything even resembling an NBA caliber big man, he struggles badly.
Rebounding-wise, you’d probably expect Thabeet to make more of an impact than he currently does considering his awesome physical tools. He in fact ranks just 47th of the 56 NCAA centers that are in our database in this category per 40 minutes pace adjusted, despite standing 7-3. His poor hands are most evident in this part of his game, as are his lack of fundamentals--boxing out his man lackadaisically, and going after rebounds with just one hand. He’ll often take himself out of position for rebounds by chasing blocked shots excessively, which further hurts him in this category.
Another problem here is that Thabeet doesn’t seem to be the most active player in the world, rarely going out of his area for rebounds, and not really showing the type of fire and passion you see out of players who just want the ball more than their opponents. At times you get the feeling that Thabeet is not going 100%, as he’ll look sleepy, distant, and not involved in what’s going on on the floor. There have been question marks raised constantly regarding his motor, work ethic and love for the game, which is a huge concern considering how far off he is at the moment from reaching his full potential, and how much individual work he’ll have to put in to get there.
With that said, Thabeet seems to be making some clear strides as a player this year, and obviously has a lot more room to grow. He’ll be tempted to enter the draft this year already and possibly cash in on being selected somewhere in the first round, but would clearly benefit long-term from being patient and spending another year in college under Coach Calhoun, who has a sparkling reputation for developing NBA big men.
I agree with most of this article which is fair. He may well develop into a very good player, but has a ways to go. I also dislike when critics start to question desire.
You could have just posted the link you know. As far as criticizing desire, you're right that no one can really know. But when you see a player for a whole season or two you start to get an idea of how they approach the game. Some guys play with a competitive edge and some guys don't. That's not to say those players don't have the desire to win, and the desire to get better -- just that it is a factor that scouts have to consider and unless you show something, either in the game or in interviews or whatever, that indicates you have it, it's going to be a question mark.
Oh, and where's the love for OJ Mayo scoring 37 on Saturday eh? He also led the team in assists (only 4, but the way the rest of the team was shooting that day, 4 assists isn't bad). I really hope this guy slips in the draft. We need a PF more, but he could be a heck of a PG for somebody. I have a feeling the tournament will raise his stock out of our range though.
As far as criticizing desire, you're right that no one can really know. But when you see a player for a whole season or two you start to get an idea of how they approach the game. Some guys play with a competitive edge and some guys don't. That's not to say those players don't have the desire to win, and the desire to get better -- just that it is a factor that scouts have to consider and unless you show something, either in the game or in interviews or whatever, that indicates you have it, it's going to be a question mark.Oh, and where's the love for OJ Mayo scoring 37 on Saturday eh? He also led the team in assists (only 4, but the way the rest of the team was shooting that day, 4 assists isn't bad). I really hope this guy slips in the draft. We need a PF more, but he could be a heck of a PG for somebody. I have a feeling the tournament will raise his stock out of our range though.