No actually I wouldn't take Arthur or Jordan or Randolph at 6 either. I think moving up is a bad idea to be honest, unless we get a top 5 pick and have a shot at Bayless/Mayo/maybe Lopez and that's not likely to happen. I'm actually perfectly happy with where we're drafting. I don't like the guys projected to go 5-10 like Gallinari(no need for SF), Jordan(too raw IMO, I'd pick him at 10 or if he's there at 12 but not real high), Love(too soft/unathletic and doesn't compliment Kevin or Spencer unless we're going for softest team ever assembled), etc. The only 2 guys I like who might be projected to go there are Augustin and Westbrook but I wouldn't move up for them. I actually really like picking at #12, I like the prospects projected to go 10-20 better than the guys projected 5-10.
Kings Select in the 2008 NBA DRAFT??
- Thread starter =LarryLegend=
- Start date
No actually I wouldn't take Arthur or Jordan or Randolph at 6 either. I think moving up is a bad idea to be honest, unless we get a top 5 pick and have a shot at Bayless/Mayo/maybe Lopez and that's not likely to happen. I'm actually perfectly happy with where we're drafting. I don't like the guys projected to go 5-10 like Gallinari(no need for SF), Jordan(too raw IMO, I'd pick him at 10 or if he's there at 12 but not real high), Love(too soft/unathletic and doesn't compliment Kevin or Spencer unless we're going for softest team ever assembled), etc. The only 2 guys I like who might be projected to go there are Augustin and Westbrook but I wouldn't move up for them. I actually really like picking at #12, I like the prospects projected to go 10-20 better than the guys projected 5-10.
I might have not explained very well. I was all over the place with that last post..
I was saying I wouldn't take Arthur, or McGee even at 12th (didn't mean to say 6th if I did).. I would take Jordan based on his senior year in high school, and recruiting ranking. Randolph on the other hand I wouldn't take at 12th even if he slipped because I don't think enough is known about him. He wasn't highly recruited, and played for a bad team (for all intents and purposes a lower D1 team ability wise). Westbrook, and Augustin I would take at #12 because we need a PG even if Beno re-signs.
This is my draft list.
Speights over Westbrook, and Augustin.
Augustin over Westbrook.
One of those three have to be available. If not then I don't know who I would take.. Probably take whoever dropped out of 1-11 and trade him to a team that needs him for a PF.
Through Petrie's eye's huh. Well, I only saw him play a couple of times. He had a good tournament and looks fairly athletic. From everything I've read about him, he's only played organized basketball for 5 yr's. Its always hard to get a read on players like that. He has obvious upside. The question is, is he a PF or a SF. He doesn't have much of an outside game at this pt, and I'm not sure he'll be able to score in the low post in the NBA like he did in college. He's obviously not worth the 12th pick in the draft, and I'm not sure he'll be picked in the first round. I might have a more favorable opinion if I had seen him play more.
A thought on the mysterious Euro player(s) Geoff was supposedly looking into...
Anyone think it could have been Nikola Pekovic? It seems like he's ranked really low because he's said some negative things about the NBA, and suggested that he wants to stay in Europe. But maybe someone like Vlade might be able to get him to reconsider? He's offensively dangerous enough to have GP appeal, and I note that on this morning's draftexpress list, he's also one of our second round picks, so the pieces seem to fit...
Anyway, just thought I'd throw that idea out there.
Anyone think it could have been Nikola Pekovic? It seems like he's ranked really low because he's said some negative things about the NBA, and suggested that he wants to stay in Europe. But maybe someone like Vlade might be able to get him to reconsider? He's offensively dangerous enough to have GP appeal, and I note that on this morning's draftexpress list, he's also one of our second round picks, so the pieces seem to fit...
Anyway, just thought I'd throw that idea out there.
IBAKA - Trade Down
I'd rather go for the project who is an athletic freak than go for the more polished player with less upside. Let's take a trip to the Congo. Trade down, get two more 2nd rounders and pick Ibaka. According to the scouting reports, he can make a significant impact on D right now. You know that Theus is going to play Miki next year for most of the minutes, no matter what other pf we would pick, so let the guy get a few minutes here and there and maybe in 3 years we have a legit uber-athlete who could be a great complement to Hawes. Just a thought.
I'd rather go for the project who is an athletic freak than go for the more polished player with less upside. Let's take a trip to the Congo. Trade down, get two more 2nd rounders and pick Ibaka. According to the scouting reports, he can make a significant impact on D right now. You know that Theus is going to play Miki next year for most of the minutes, no matter what other pf we would pick, so let the guy get a few minutes here and there and maybe in 3 years we have a legit uber-athlete who could be a great complement to Hawes. Just a thought.
Yeah, although there are some possible ways around the $500K thing, I believe you're right about it, and that the buyout clauses can involve price tags considerably higher than the player's pay. If he signed a contract with one of those, I guess we'd have to assess the recruitment effort as a failure. I'd also have to wonder WTH he was thinking in entering the draft. Not many teams would want to wait 3 years for a guy who'd be 26, and totally unacclimated to the NBA, when he arrived -- if he ever does.
But maybe there's no enormous buyout price -- Gallinari, for example, is under contract for 2 more years, but has no buyout price at all, he can walk whenever he likes. We can always hope.
But maybe there's no enormous buyout price -- Gallinari, for example, is under contract for 2 more years, but has no buyout price at all, he can walk whenever he likes. We can always hope.
A Greek team! Ha! Good luck with that. Remember POAK kept Peja for three years before Petrie finally got him here. There wasn't any buyout for Peja then. I doubt there is one for Pekovic now.
Btw, this is from following soccer, it seems not all countries in Europe have buyouts. Spain have buyouts because it's a law over there. But otherwise, most Euro clubs outside of Spain are not required to have bo in the contracts.
Btw, this is from following soccer, it seems not all countries in Europe have buyouts. Spain have buyouts because it's a law over there. But otherwise, most Euro clubs outside of Spain are not required to have bo in the contracts.
I would love for the Kings to find a way to get Ibaka. But I would not like to trade down to do it. I would much rather see us parlay some of our depth for a late first-rounder. Another 2nd rounder doesn't do much for me either. We already have two and both of them aren't as close to the end of the first round as I would like. But Ibaka...yes, yes and more yes.
I'm right in line with your logic. We are in a position where we have some time to develop a "raw" prospect. And if we pick up a raw prospect or two, I would much rather grab one this year, and maybe the next, and then focus on drafting skilled players in the following drafts.
Every team needs a plan. It is pretty obvious what the Kings' needs are. I would have liked to see us grab a PG this year, but this draft looks weak for PG's at the 12th pick. We can postpone grabbing a PG to next year, when we will hopefully have a better pick, and it won't delay the rebuild. So that makes the decision a little bit easier. We grab a PF/C with our first pick and we make sure this is a guy that can, or has the potential to, compliment Hawes as best as possible (for the 12th pick). The two strongest attributes of this player should be rebounding and defense IMO (insert picture of beating dead horse), or they should have all the necessary physical qualities to do those things at a high level and we can spend the time developing him to that point.
I'm right in line with your logic. We are in a position where we have some time to develop a "raw" prospect. And if we pick up a raw prospect or two, I would much rather grab one this year, and maybe the next, and then focus on drafting skilled players in the following drafts.
Every team needs a plan. It is pretty obvious what the Kings' needs are. I would have liked to see us grab a PG this year, but this draft looks weak for PG's at the 12th pick. We can postpone grabbing a PG to next year, when we will hopefully have a better pick, and it won't delay the rebuild. So that makes the decision a little bit easier. We grab a PF/C with our first pick and we make sure this is a guy that can, or has the potential to, compliment Hawes as best as possible (for the 12th pick). The two strongest attributes of this player should be rebounding and defense IMO (insert picture of beating dead horse), or they should have all the necessary physical qualities to do those things at a high level and we can spend the time developing him to that point.
What makes you think our draft chances next year will be any better than they are this year? We lost Bibby, but we barely had him last year anyway, we lost Justin and Dahntay but gained Shelden, the youngsters got a little better and the vets got a year older. Dallas and Phoenix made dumb trades, but LA made out like bandits. Seems like a wash to me. But we might get a decent draft pick or two. Reggie might do a better job. I'm thinking that we might wind up 13th-14th next season. Tiny chance that we'd make the playoffs, but if we did, ouch... 8th seed would get like 20th pick, since most of the EC playoff teams suck so bad.
Are you expecting the start of a rebuild?
Are you expecting the start of a rebuild?
I think, at least in their mind, they have started the rebuild. Probably not the way you and I would want, or most of the people on this fourm would want. The Maloff's are trying to maintain the best of both worlds. Rebuild the team and keep people in the seats. Hard to do and maintain credibility.
Petrie may influence what the future core of this team is, and what is needed to complete that core, but I have serious doubts that he is deciding which road to take to get there.
Petrie may influence what the future core of this team is, and what is needed to complete that core, but I have serious doubts that he is deciding which road to take to get there.
You think we might make the playoffs? We would have needed to win 50 games this year to make the playoffs and there still was no guarantee. We are quite a ways away from winning 50 games in today's Western Conference.
Teams in the West that are beter than us:
Lakers, Hornets, Spurs, Jazz, Rockets, Suns, Mavs, Nuggs, Warriors
Portland is on the way up and they won more games than us so I would put them in that list too. If the Clipps get and stay fully healthy then they could win more games than us too.
So right there I don't see us having a legitimate chance at making the PO's next year. In a couple years Seattle will be in the picture too. And we haven't even touched bottom yet. We haven't gotten that top pick/superstar and until we do we will continue to be the 2nd class of the West.
IMO, we have at least 3 years until we will be a legitimate PO team. And we shouldn't try to rush our rebuild because these solid teams in the West are built to win now and in the next couple years. Not to mention that we have some crippling contracts.
We aren't in a good position both financially and talent-wise to make moves towards the top. We need to make moves that bump us closer to the bottom of the league so we can get more/better talent through the draft (and develop it) while we slowly improve our financial situation. Even if we wanted to shoot for the stars we still would have a tough time getting a worse draft pick than this year.
Teams in the West that are beter than us:
Lakers, Hornets, Spurs, Jazz, Rockets, Suns, Mavs, Nuggs, Warriors
Portland is on the way up and they won more games than us so I would put them in that list too. If the Clipps get and stay fully healthy then they could win more games than us too.
So right there I don't see us having a legitimate chance at making the PO's next year. In a couple years Seattle will be in the picture too. And we haven't even touched bottom yet. We haven't gotten that top pick/superstar and until we do we will continue to be the 2nd class of the West.
IMO, we have at least 3 years until we will be a legitimate PO team. And we shouldn't try to rush our rebuild because these solid teams in the West are built to win now and in the next couple years. Not to mention that we have some crippling contracts.
We aren't in a good position both financially and talent-wise to make moves towards the top. We need to make moves that bump us closer to the bottom of the league so we can get more/better talent through the draft (and develop it) while we slowly improve our financial situation. Even if we wanted to shoot for the stars we still would have a tough time getting a worse draft pick than this year.
Re: the playoffs, I said "tiny chance," and meant it. Amazing draft picks, Reggie coaching his brains out, completely uncharacteristic luck, and a couple of good moves by Geoff and it could happen. But I didn't mean to focus on the really, really long shot.
I just don't see why we should expect significantly better draft position next year. If the rebuild continues to be a mirage on the horizon, I expect next year to be pretty similar to this one. With strong and decisive management intervention, that could change, but so far all I've seen is directionless wanting to get better while refusing to take their medicine.
So I guess I'm expecting to stay in the 11-14 range for a couple more years after this. Nobody else wants to be there, so we can just hang out without fear of being bumped out of place. Bleak, yeah, but at least I won't be disappointed.
I just don't see why we should expect significantly better draft position next year. If the rebuild continues to be a mirage on the horizon, I expect next year to be pretty similar to this one. With strong and decisive management intervention, that could change, but so far all I've seen is directionless wanting to get better while refusing to take their medicine.
So I guess I'm expecting to stay in the 11-14 range for a couple more years after this. Nobody else wants to be there, so we can just hang out without fear of being bumped out of place. Bleak, yeah, but at least I won't be disappointed.
I totally agree! If I had my druthers, Petrie would wangle another mid round #1 and we would have our cake and eat it too. How about Westbrook (a point guard who can defend) and Ibaka (a pf that can defend)? That said, it's hard for me to be optimistic about Petrie doing such a sensible thing. If he did, my excitement level for this team would triple.
There has been a fair amount of people suggesting that Westbrook should be our 12th selection in the draft. There's no denying his potential. However, there are a lot of reasons to be wary of selecting him. If your selecting him as a future pt guard he has a lot of improving to do. He's not the best ballhandler in the world. Especially in a transition game. He tends to be out of control a little too much for me. Just the opposite is true when he's not the ballhandler and is able to leak out in transition. In a halfcourt set, he's much better, unless he's asked to penetrate to create, and once again he tends to get out of control and make bad decisions.
As a 2 guard, he's undersized and his outside shot is less than consistant. I don't mean to unjustly criticize him. I actually like him quite a bit, I just think he's a gamble, and if I have to gamble, I would rather do it with someone 6'11" than someone 6'3".
As an on the ball defender, he's terrific, and he's able to guard both the pt and the 2. But as a pt guard, offensively, he's a project. He may be worth it down the road, but buyer beware.
As a 2 guard, he's undersized and his outside shot is less than consistant. I don't mean to unjustly criticize him. I actually like him quite a bit, I just think he's a gamble, and if I have to gamble, I would rather do it with someone 6'11" than someone 6'3".
As an on the ball defender, he's terrific, and he's able to guard both the pt and the 2. But as a pt guard, offensively, he's a project. He may be worth it down the road, but buyer beware.
From what I can see, anyone we pick at #12 is a project (as you say above). That's what we get for being #12. Speights apparently will have issues right away with defense. That's bothersome on a team that isn't very good defensively in the paint. So do you take a guy that can make some impact on guarding the superstar point guards of the West, or do you take a pf that might have an impact offensively, but not defensively in his first and second year? Interesting quandry. I think this is going to be a very difficult year for Petrie to make a decision in this draft.
I look at it this way -- the goal of this franchise is to become a good defensive team, the type of team that wins championships with their defense. That's what the Maloofs said when they let Adelman go and it's what both coaches since have stated when they got the job. The only way to do that is to assemble a team with players at every position that know their role on defense and have the ability to be better than their opponent on that end of the floor.
So you look at a guy like Westbrook and yes he's a project as a point guard. There's not a good track record of 2 guards moving over to play PG in the NBA and doing it successfully. On the other hand, Westbrook isn't a classic tweener case because he did run his team's offense capably for half the season this year and has the assist numbers to prove it. He wasn't a full-time scorer in college like Douby was. He's also an elite athlete with very good lane penetration and finishing skills at the basket. Those are key skills for a point guard, so he's not hopeless offensively. For instance, Tony Parker was much more experienced as a point when he came into the league, but his offensive skillset didn't include much more than lane penetration and finishing ability until just a couple seasons ago when he got a full-time shot coach. So speaking of Westbrook, you don't need him to become something he's not, you just need him to improve his skill level, play under control, and learn your offensive system. Those are reasonable expectations.
Then on the other side of the floor, Westbrook is debatably the best defender at the PG position in this draft. If he's not the best, he's at least in the same class as the best and he's got the skills to be a good defender right away. And that's why I think he's a good fit for this team. Obviously it would be nice to hold out on filling that PG position until the next Chris Paul comes around, but looking at this realistically, there's unlikely going to be another opportunity to draft a potentially elite defensive PG with some proven offensive skills as well. We don't necessarily need a deadeye shooter. I say start with the defensive end and work from there.
That being said, I'd still probably pass on Westbrook if the right big man were still available because that's a greater need and a harder position to fill.
So you look at a guy like Westbrook and yes he's a project as a point guard. There's not a good track record of 2 guards moving over to play PG in the NBA and doing it successfully. On the other hand, Westbrook isn't a classic tweener case because he did run his team's offense capably for half the season this year and has the assist numbers to prove it. He wasn't a full-time scorer in college like Douby was. He's also an elite athlete with very good lane penetration and finishing skills at the basket. Those are key skills for a point guard, so he's not hopeless offensively. For instance, Tony Parker was much more experienced as a point when he came into the league, but his offensive skillset didn't include much more than lane penetration and finishing ability until just a couple seasons ago when he got a full-time shot coach. So speaking of Westbrook, you don't need him to become something he's not, you just need him to improve his skill level, play under control, and learn your offensive system. Those are reasonable expectations.
Then on the other side of the floor, Westbrook is debatably the best defender at the PG position in this draft. If he's not the best, he's at least in the same class as the best and he's got the skills to be a good defender right away. And that's why I think he's a good fit for this team. Obviously it would be nice to hold out on filling that PG position until the next Chris Paul comes around, but looking at this realistically, there's unlikely going to be another opportunity to draft a potentially elite defensive PG with some proven offensive skills as well. We don't necessarily need a deadeye shooter. I say start with the defensive end and work from there.
That being said, I'd still probably pass on Westbrook if the right big man were still available because that's a greater need and a harder position to fill.
Last edited: