and with the #1 pick in the 2009 NBA draft the Kings select...

[ParniValjak]

Say if Rubio were to declare for this draft, but he'd have to stay overseas for a year, would that bother anyone? Downside is that we'd have to wait a year before he can start being integrated into the franchise and we'd likely still suck for another year. Upside, we'd actually get him and we get more lins next year.

It wouldn't bother me in the slightest. In fact it would be a great situation IMHO. He can stay in europe and work on things that he needs to work on and we would have no improvement from this season. In other words we would suck enough 2 years in a row to be in top 5 pick contention. Play the kids, get some more development into Hawes, Thompson and Greene. Get another top 5 pick, and have massive amount of money to spend in summer of 2010.

In 2010-2011, we could be back in the play-off contention if we play our cards right.

If we get a chance to pick up Rubio, I would do it in a second.

 

[Kingster]

The NBA team is limited to contributing $500,000 to the buyout, so it's really Rubio's headache to foot the bill and figure out at what point it's worth it to come over here.

Interesting. Thanks.

 

[kennadog]

Don't forget, our new assistant GM is the one that went over and negotiated Hedo's buyout so he could come to the NBA. Impressed GP with his work on that.

 

[gunks]

Monroe needs to bang more and improve his overall aggressiveness. His athleticism concerns me, but he has good quickness and is bouncy (albeit doesn't get very high). He needs to find the right weight to balance his power and finesse game. His IQ is off the charts though and that's a big reason why I think he'll succeed.

Soft, unathletic big with crazy basketball IQ and passing skills?


I think I know who Petrie wants

 

[Vlade4GM]

Soft, unathletic big with crazy basketball IQ and passing skills?


I think I know who Petrie wants

He's not unathletic, he's a good athlete, just not a great one.

 

[Kingster]

Monroe needs to bang more and improve his overall aggressiveness. His athleticism concerns me, but he has good quickness and is bouncy (albeit doesn't get very high). He needs to find the right weight to balance his power and finesse game. His IQ is off the charts though and that's a big reason why I think he'll succeed.

Hill just had a big game against UCLA. I' really starting to wonder if Hill isn't better than Monroe. Maybe his BB IQ isn't as high, but from what I can tell he's quicker and bigger than Monroe.

 

[bajaden]

Georgia Tech/Duke:

Not so impressed with Gani Lawal. He's 6'9", tough, and runs the floor, but he looks like he's still learning how to play the game. Offensively he can't do very much at all, and the few shots he made looked like they were incredibly lucky to go in. Terrible free throw shooter. He's also not particularly explosive, but since he's strong and mobile and has good hands he's an extremely good rebounder. But he's such a long way off offensively, and since he lacks ideal size and athleticism, don't know how valuable he's going to be in the NBA. I could see him as a Reggie Evans type, but not much more.

And wow is Kyle Singler the second coming of Mike Dunleavy. If he had a famous dad he might go #3 in this draft.

I agree with you on everything you said except the explosive part. he's got pretty good hops. There's not doubt that he's a project, and certainly not worth a top five pick. But if he's available when we make our second pick, he's someone I would consider.

 

[nbrans]

Hill just had a big game against ULCA. I' really starting to wonder if Hill isn't better than Monroe. Maybe his BB IQ isn't as high, but from what I can tell he's quicker and bigger than Monroe.

He is bigger and more athletic, don't know about quicker. But he's definitely not better. He dominated against UCLA's small front line, but it wasn't really due to anything that he was doing that was particularly impressive. He was just a big dude cleaning up junk.

 

[nbrans]

I agree with you on everything you said except the explosive part. he's got pretty good hops. There's not doubt that he's a project, and certainly not worth a top five pick. But if he's available when we make our second pick, he's someone I would consider.

Yeah, he's very athletic, but not quite in the Kenyon Martin/Hakeem Warrick/Tyrus Thomas range.

 

[bajaden]

So basically I think there are two Thabeets. There is the Bad Thabeet, who looks like he was pulled off the street and given a uniform, and there's the Good Thabeet, who looks like a force. Seems like you're either getting one or the other, even in the same game. I suspect some of you have only seen Bad Thabeet, and I don't blame you for thinking we'd be crazy to draft him. Just keep watching, and maybe Good Thabeet will show up.

And there in lies the rub. Is he worth a top five, or even a top ten pick? To me, definitely not a top five. Is he worth taking a gamble on at some point in the draft? Yes, I think so, but the question is, when? I would gamble with Houston's pick, but he probably won't be there then.

You get the feeling that some day a light is going to go off in his head, and suddenly he'll start to become that player we all covet. Duane Causwell was a very good athlete. Unfortunately, he never got it. I still believe you have to draft players on what they can do, and not on what you hope they'll be able to do.

 

[bajaden]

He is bigger and more athletic, don't know about quicker. But he's definitely not better. He dominated against UCLA's small front line, but it wasn't really due to anything that he was doing that was particularly impressive. He was just a big dude cleaning up junk.

I like Hill quite a bit. Lets not forget that he's only had five years of organized basketball. He's improved every year, which is a good sign. He's aggressive around the basket and has quite a few different ways to score. For some reason my gut tells me he's going to be a pretty good player in the NBA. I have the same feeling about Harden, who I've seen quite a bit of in the last two years.

I actually think Harden will be better in the NBA. Arizona St. is a one trick pony, and Harden is it. Most teams that play them concentrate on shutting down Harden. That won't happen in the NBA unless he suddenly becomes the next coming of Jordan. He's a smart player and he'll adjust. He is still a kid.

 

[wonjaeyou]

It looks like Kings will have very very low chance of getting first round pick...

 

[nbrans]

I like Hill quite a bit. Lets not forget that he's only had five years of organized basketball. He's improved every year, which is a good sign. He's aggressive around the basket and has quite a few different ways to score. For some reason my gut tells me he's going to be a pretty good player in the NBA. I have the same feeling about Harden, who I've seen quite a bit of in the last two years.

I actually think Harden will be better in the NBA. Arizona St. is a one trick pony, and Harden is it. Most teams that play them concentrate on shutting down Harden. That won't happen in the NBA unless he suddenly becomes the next coming of Jordan. He's a smart player and he'll adjust. He is still a kid.

I'm always completely confused when commentators talk about how some guys haven't been playing basketball very long as if it's a benefit. I don't understand this. You heard it about Quincy Douby, Joe Alexander... as if they're going to be such much better because they've only been playing a few years and lack the years of experience other players have had. Give me someone who has been playing since he's been in diapers any day! I have seen no evidence of any player whose learning curve was faster simply because he started basketball later in life.

Hill is scrappy, but I just don't see him doing much in the NBA. But I've said my piece on him.

If teams were really focusing solely on Harden and double-teaming him, I'd agree with you. But ASU is more than a one man team, and when Harden struggled against Stanford, Landry was just playing him straight up. From the accounts last night, it seems like Hackett was guarding him straight up. No junk, no gimmicks. He's just sruggling being guarded than guys who are big and athletic. I'm not convinced he has the athleticism to adjust. He's just not as quick as Roy and definitely not as athletic as Foye or Wade or Stuckey or some of the other 2s who have succeeded at 6'4". We'll see, I guess.

 

[OptimusRhyme]

I like Monroe, good passer, for our cutters Martin, Garcia, good shooter can stretch the opposing big men. High IQ, and knows the princeton style of offense. I say we take him and let Carril groom him into a monster.

 

[Bricklayer]

I like Monroe, good passer, for our cutters Martin, Garcia, good shooter can stretch the opposing big men. High IQ, and knows the princeton style of offense. I say we take him and let Carril groom him into a monster.

A monstrous 5reb/gm center?

 

[Sptsjunkie]

A monstrous 5reb/gm center?

That's the obvious red flag, but let's see how the rest of the season unfolds. Physically, there's no reason why he couldn't be a good rebounder, so that may be a part of his game he is growing into.

 

[Dime Dropper]

A monstrous 5reb/gm center?

He is averaging 6.5 rebs in 29 mins a game. Certainly nothing to be excited about, but I don't think his rebounding is as weak as advertised by some on here. Perhaps it is because he spends alot of the time setting up the offense (in which case you have to ask yourself, do we want another big man who operates from the high post?).

Either way, I can't say I don't like Monroe. Not that he's my favourite player in the draft, but he can flat out play. He is a pretty ridiculous passer for his size. Really is reminiscent of C-Webb. It's a shame he doesn't have Webbs athleticism, but he was a rare breed. Monroe is pretty polished and can do it all.

As well as averaging 13.5 points, he is getting two steals a game (very good hands) and blocking two shots, to go along with almost 3 assists. He has a nice frame to add muscle. He is silky smooth. While he's not likely to save the franchise, I don't really see how anyone could criticise the pick. He is a big talent, and regardless of who we take this year, we are going to be right back here next year. And possibly the year after that. Might as well build up the best talent we can rather than reach for a "need" (I don't believe we have any needs now because our team will be completely different by the time we're done rebuilding (if we really actually are)), and get the remaining pieces in later drafts when the position of need can be better filled.

He seems very much like a GP pick too, which I am OK with. There aren't many can't-miss prospects in this draft, unfortunately.

 

[nbrans]

We can't keep drafting and signing weak defenders and rebounders and hope that the defense and rebounding is going to magically improve. Yeah, Hawes has blocked some shots this season, and great. He's still a weak man defender. Thompson looks like a solid rebounder. But we've already far surpassed our quota for bad defenders and rebounders. I don't know if I can bear to have someone like Monroe on the roster. We've been there, done that, and it didn't work.

The offense is fine. We need some dirty work players. We need toughness. Monroe will be fine for someone else. Can't we actually have an above-average defender on the team besides Salmons? Too much to ask?

 

[bajaden]

I'm always completely confused when commentators talk about how some guys haven't been playing basketball very long as if it's a benefit. I don't understand this. You heard it about Quincy Douby, Joe Alexander... as if they're going to be such much better because they've only been playing a few years and lack the years of experience other players have had. Give me someone who has been playing since he's been in diapers any day! I have seen no evidence of any player whose learning curve was faster simply because he started basketball later in life.

I was not using his lack of playing the game as a yardstick for all players. I was using it as an exception. My point is that he has made dramatic improvements despite the lack of playing time that many other players have had. That tells me that he, as an individual has a pretty fast learning curve and probably a pretty good work ethic.

Thabeet has had about the same amount of years of experience and he shows me that he doesn't have a very high learning curve, or he doesn't put in the work. When you start playing basketball has nothing to do with your learning curve. Your either smart or your not. You can run fast or you can't. You can jump high or you can't. Its an individual thing.

 

[nbrans]

I was not using his lack of playing the game as a yardstick for all players. I was using it as an exception. My point is that he has made dramatic improvements despite the lack of playing time that many other players have had. That tells me that he, as an individual has a pretty fast learning curve and probably a pretty good work ethic.

Thabeet has had about the same amount of years of experience and he shows me that he doesn't have a very high learning curve, or he doesn't put in the work. When you start playing basketball has nothing to do with your learning curve. Your either smart or your not. You can run fast or you can't. You can jump high or you can't. Its an individual thing.

Wait a second there, I don't see Thabeet's lack of experience as a benefit, but to say he hasn't improved is wrong, in fact he's improved arguably as much as Hill. His points, rebounds, and shooting percentage have all gone up each year. Hill's rebounding is up, but his shooting percentage has actually gone down -- he's just getting more looks.

There's nothing that Hill is doing that's overly impressive. It's not like he has any semblance of an offensive game. He's a dirty work player, same as Thabeet, only I'd rather have Thabeet because I think his height, athleticism and shotblocking gives him a better chance of translating.

 

[bajaden]

We can't keep drafting and signing weak defenders and rebounders and hope that the defense and rebounding is going to magically improve. Yeah, Hawes has blocked some shots this season, and great. He's still a weak man defender. Thompson looks like a solid rebounder. But we've already far surpassed our quota for bad defenders and rebounders. I don't know if I can bear to have someone like Monroe on the roster. We've been there, done that, and it didn't work.

The offense is fine. We need some dirty work players. We need toughness. Monroe will be fine for someone else. Can't we actually have an above-average defender on the team besides Salmons? Too much to ask?

I know where your coming from and I agree with you to a certain extent. First of all, I think its a little early to close the book on the potential of Hawes or Thompson. I've seen improvements in Thompsons defense, and whether sucessful or not at the present, Hawes has displayed a fiestyness on defense. They both seem commited to improving, so who knows at this point how good they might become.

I, personaly am not as big on shot blocking as some are. Don't get me wrong. I would love to have a big time shot blocker. However they're few and far between. Right now, of all the bigs that are projected to go in the top ten, I would probably pick either Hill or Griffin. Hill is probably a better defender at the moment, but Griffin has the athleticism and ability to be a good defender.

It could be that what you want will have to come from somewhere else. Either a trade or a freeagent signing.

I really like Monroe, but at the moment I simply don't see him as a defensive juggernaught. To be truthful, its rare for any player to come out of college and have defensive impact. And if they do, they usually suffer on the offensive end. So its sort of, pick you poison.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I dont trust our coaching staff to teach anyone how to rebound or defend .. if were getting a big he better be able to do those things first and then we'll teach him how to shoot from the perimete .. all jokes aside, I mean the first thing I said ..


Im still for rubio, and curry is growing on me ..

 

[LPKingsFan]

We can't keep drafting and signing weak defenders and rebounders and hope that the defense and rebounding is going to magically improve. Yeah, Hawes has blocked some shots this season, and great. He's still a weak man defender. Thompson looks like a solid rebounder. But we've already far surpassed our quota for bad defenders and rebounders. I don't know if I can bear to have someone like Monroe on the roster. We've been there, done that, and it didn't work.

The offense is fine. We need some dirty work players. We need toughness. Monroe will be fine for someone else. Can't we actually have an above-average defender on the team besides Salmons? Too much to ask?

Agree with you mostly, but we're still in no position to turn down talent if it's there. If Petrie thinks Monroe has what it takes to be a star, a viable #1 guy, despite defensive deficiencies, he should take him. Then you trade either Spencer or Jason if it's clear neither can be The Man for us. While I am tempted to jump on The Gambit bandwagon, the thought of taking a guy who's only going to play 20 minutes for us a game -- even if those 20 minutes bring some dirty work, toughness, and defense -- with a top five pick worries me tremendously.

I in no way think Monroe will be that guy at this point, but in general terms, we're still searching for The Man, and can't afford to pick a roleplayer. We can find our Pollard later, but we need our Webber sooner.

But thanks, as always, to everyone for making this thread a good read. As I'm now out of the country for the next few games, reading about the draft and checking the box scores is about all I have. This thread is, sad to say, what being a Kings fan is all about these days.

 

[Kingster]

He is bigger and more athletic, don't know about quicker. But he's definitely not better. He dominated against UCLA's small front line, but it wasn't really due to anything that he was doing that was particularly impressive. He was just a big dude cleaning up junk.

I really think he is quicker, but I'd be the first to admit that gauging quickness isn't easy. Other than the, "you know when you see it" test, I'd like to know how scouts gauge quickness, or maybe they they just leave that to the workouts. I don't know. It would be very interesting to see Monroe and Hill go head to head.

 

[Kingster]

We can't keep drafting and signing weak defenders and rebounders and hope that the defense and rebounding is going to magically improve. Yeah, Hawes has blocked some shots this season, and great. He's still a weak man defender. Thompson looks like a solid rebounder. But we've already far surpassed our quota for bad defenders and rebounders. I don't know if I can bear to have someone like Monroe on the roster. We've been there, done that, and it didn't work.

The offense is fine. We need some dirty work players. We need toughness. Monroe will be fine for someone else. Can't we actually have an above-average defender on the team besides Salmons? Too much to ask?

Well, maybe if we get Monroe we trade him. Believe me, I appreciate very much that we need gritty, tough, athletic guys who can D up and get after it. I really think Garcia is above average, largely because he is a good defender off the ball as well as on. Thompson is definitely going to be one in my opinion. Hawes is up in the air a little, but I really think he can too (I have a feeling his offensive slump/lack of minutes is hurting his D right now).

Terrence Williams is a guy that I like for all the qualities that you are looking for. The guy is a stat stuffing monster rebounding wing. He's not the greatest shooter at this point in his career, but the rest of his game is exactly what we need. Maybe we draft him with Houston's #1 or in the second round if Salmons gets traded?

 

[bajaden]

Wait a second there, I don't see Thabeet's lack of experience as a benefit, but to say he hasn't improved is wrong, in fact he's improved arguably as much as Hill. His points, rebounds, and shooting percentage have all gone up each year. Hill's rebounding is up, but his shooting percentage has actually gone down -- he's just getting more looks.

There's nothing that Hill is doing that's overly impressive. It's not like he has any semblance of an offensive game. He's a dirty work player, same as Thabeet, only I'd rather have Thabeet because I think his height, athleticism and shotblocking gives him a better chance of translating.

This is my last word on this because, number one, you not listening to what I'm saying, so I'm wasting my breath. I never said that Thabeet hasn't improved. I simply stated that his improvement hasn't been dramatic and at times he reverts back to the same old habits. Personaly, I'm disappointed in him. I would love for him to be everything I want him to be. But he's not.

If you think that Hill is just a garbage player and has no offensive game. Then one of us is blind. And its not me. Either you haven't really watched enough games, or your so in love with Thabeet its blinding your judgement.

Thabeet has two jobs right now. One is to stand near the post and defend it. Its the one thing he's good at. At least at the college level. The other is at the offensive end. Where his job is clean up the garbage and occasionaly receive passes and dunk the ball. At this end, he's somewhere between poor and average. He's constantly confused on the offensive end and makes bad decisions that a good highschool player wouldn't make. He gets bullied out of position by much smaller players and gets outrebounded by smaller players. He still doesn't know how to block out properly, or if he does, he refuses to do it. Personally, I think he has a low basketball IQ, and I'm not sure it will get any better. The last thing I want to see is a 7'3" player sitting at the end of the Kings bench because he can't understand how to play the game.

You'll have to excuse my rant. But I'm old school. I'am sick to death of players that aren't fundamentaly sound, and don't have a clue how to even run a simple version of a pick and roll. They don't know how to block out for rebounds or how to set a simple screen. They don't know how to recognize a double team coming and how to pass out of it. Please spare me the point guard that looks at the floor while he's bringing up the ball. Something Beno does on occasion.

Last year there were two or three people including myself that were touting Jason Thompson. You know what I heard? He wasn't athletic. He can't jump. He's too slow. Nonsense! All of it. I kept thinking, Am I blind. Has time finally passed me by and I can no longer recognize talent. Apparently not!

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I have no dog in this hunt. I only report what I see. I don't report what I want to see. If I have to choose between a player with limited skills but a lot of potential and a player thats very skilled but with limited future potential, I'll take the skilled player every time. As Vince Lombardi said: " Potential means you haven't done anything yet ".

 

[nbrans]

Hey, I wasn't willfully misunderstanding you. I thought you were saying Thabeet hadn't improved. If that's not what you meant, ok.

I also think I'm going into this with eyes wide open. I have already said that Thabeet's lapses worry me, that I don't like that he hasn't played basketball that long, etc. etc. In another year and another draft class I wouldn't want him. But outside of Blake Griffin, I think Thabeet has the most potential to be a home run in this draft. I am drawn to 1) his size and athleticism, which is nearly unprecedented, and 2) his shotblocking instincts. There is more to shotblocking than being big and athletic. Thabeet has the coordination, reaction time, and athleticism to be an elite shotblocker. At worst he's still a defensive roleplayer, meaning even in the worst case scenario I have a hard time seeing him as a pure bust. At best he really could be another Mutombo. You have already said that you don't value shotblocking, so of course you don't like Thabeet. It's just a philosophical difference. I tend to think that shotblocking is vital to having a good defensive team.

I have seen Hill play a looooooooooot of times. I watch a whole lot of Pac10 hoops. I've seen him from his freshman year on. He's mainly a dirty work player. He's coordinated and can score inside better than Thabeet, but he's still not a guy you dump the ball down to and let him get to work. I like his work on the glass. But as I've said all along, he always just seems to add up to less than the sum of his parts. He's not a great shotblocker. He's less effective than he should be. And I just don't know what his role is going to be in the NBA to justify a top 5 pick. He's not an elite athlete, and I don't think he's particularly skilled. He's big and strong and reasonably athletic, but he's not Chris Wilcox or Amare. To me he's Etan Thomas without the poetry.

Basically, to me, it comes down to, do you take the dirty work player who is 6'10" and reasonably athletic or do you guy with the 7'3" guy? I'll go with the 7'3" guy and cross my fingers.

 

[bajaden]

Hey, I wasn't willfully misunderstanding you. I thought you were saying Thabeet hadn't improved. If that's not what you meant, ok.

I also think I'm going into this with eyes wide open. I have already said that Thabeet's lapses worry me, that I don't like that he hasn't played basketball that long, etc. etc. In another year and another draft class I wouldn't want him. But outside of Blake Griffin, I think Thabeet has the most potential to be a home run in this draft. I am drawn to 1) his size and athleticism, which is nearly unprecedented, and 2) his shotblocking instincts. There is more to shotblocking than being big and athletic. Thabeet has the coordination, reaction time, and athleticism to be an elite shotblocker. At worst he's still a defensive roleplayer, meaning even in the worst case scenario I have a hard time seeing him as a pure bust. At best he really could be another Mutombo. You have already said that you don't value shotblocking, so of course you don't like Thabeet. It's just a philosophical difference. I tend to think that shotblocking is vital to having a good defensive team.

I have seen Hill play a looooooooooot of times. I watch a whole lot of Pac10 hoops. I've seen him from his freshman year on. He's mainly a dirty work player. He's coordinated and can score inside better than Thabeet, but he's still not a guy you dump the ball down to and let him get to work. I like his work on the glass. But as I've said all along, he always just seems to add up to less than the sum of his parts. He's not a great shotblocker. He's less effective than he should be. And I just don't know what his role is going to be in the NBA to justify a top 5 pick. He's not an elite athlete, and I don't think he's particularly skilled. He's big and strong and reasonably athletic, but he's not Chris Wilcox or Amare. To me he's Etan Thomas without the poetry.

Basically, to me, it comes down to, do you take the dirty work player who is 6'10" and reasonably athletic or do you guy with the 7'3" guy? I'll go with the 7'3" guy and cross my fingers.

OK, peace! We'll just agree to disagree, and to to be honest, I hope were both right about the player we like. By the way, its not that I don't value shotblocking. Its just that I think its overrated in the larger scheme of things. In other words, sometimes a player that tries to block every shot gets pulled out of his defensive assignment. Which can affect his rebounding or his ability to defend his assignment who is now behind him. A simple pass by the player he's trying to block and you've got a dunk behind your back. Too many times the shotblocker blocks the shot out of bounds. So the ball goes back to the other team. Or he simply blocks the ball back to the other team.

Camby in my opinon is a great shotblocker. He has the enate ability to somehow block the shot back to himself or a teammate. If Thabeet could be another Camby without Camby's offense, then he would be just fine with me.

 

[HighTopKicks]

We can't keep drafting and signing weak defenders and rebounders and hope that the defense and rebounding is going to magically improve. Yeah, Hawes has blocked some shots this season, and great. He's still a weak man defender. Thompson looks like a solid rebounder. But we've already far surpassed our quota for bad defenders and rebounders. I don't know if I can bear to have someone like Monroe on the roster. We've been there, done that, and it didn't work.

The offense is fine. We need some dirty work players. We need toughness. Monroe will be fine for someone else. Can't we actually have an above-average defender on the team besides Salmons? Too much to ask?

Dirty work players, like Scott Pollard? If you want tough hard working defenders you don't have to look for them with your top 5 draft pick. What you need with your 1st pick is a potential star, and Monroe could be the next Webber. And, even if he's not he'll still be a valueable trading chip.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I really don't see how Thabeet in even the best of scenarios could ever be Mutombo.