Greg Monro with the 5th pick
- Thread starter Sac.1989
- Start date
Very interesting. To me, that's a great case for drafting Parakhouski higher than the 2nd round and Monroe lower than the top 10, especially if you value toughness and rebounding as much as point production from a big man. (Personally, I'll take the tough guy). It's either that, or maybe there's virtually no difference in this draft between say the 10th slot and the 30th slot.
With Parakhouski I think it comes down to his playing in a lesser conference. However he did dominate in that conference averaging 21 points and 13 rebounds for the year. He also averaged a couple of blocks a game as well, but since he played a lot against players smaller than him I discount that figure some. He also played well against top competition when he had the chance.
In another year, where there wern't so many big men in the draft, I think he would probably be a first round pick. And who knows, three years from now we may look back and see that he should have been one this year. Or not!..
In another year, where there wern't so many big men in the draft, I think he would probably be a first round pick. And who knows, three years from now we may look back and see that he should have been one this year. Or not!..
Nope! Greg Monroe is a versitile offensive minded PF, and that's it. He brings the same game that a Lamar Odom or a Sam Perkins would bring...he would add to the logjam of young 'bigs' we already have. The thing Petrie needs to figure out is can he draft the center of the future in the next 2 or 3 years...can he wait on Hawes...and is there a trade that can be made in the immediate for a C that would be more beneficial? Those are the three $10,000 questions that he has to evaluate this offseason, and sooner rather than later, because if he DOES choose the 'wait and see' route with Hawes, can we afford another lost season with no production in the middle and getting muscled around down low? I think the answer is simple: you try your darndest to acquire either a higher draft pick to get Cousins/Favors, or you try even harder to get an already proved C in a trade...time to turn into Petrie/Circa 1998-2001.
disclaimer: Maybe Hawes does turn into a semi-beast this year...but the proof will be in the puddin'.
disclaimer: Maybe Hawes does turn into a semi-beast this year...but the proof will be in the puddin'.
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/06/03/2795055/georgetowns-monroe-to-work-out.html
Georgetown's Monroe to work out for Kings
Georgetown's Monroe to work out for Kings
What kings should do.
I think what the kings should do is draft wesley johnson, or monroe, or cousins for 1st round, and then they NEED to draft JARVIS VARNARDO for the 2nd round. VARNARDO has great potential, and is the best shot blocker in the country...for mississipi state, he averaged 13 pts, 10 rebounds, and 4 blocks a game, and he's just a FRESHMAN...he's a MUST HAVE for the kings because they need a solid defensive player. everybody, please help me tell all of the kings fans that VARNARDO is the MUST HAVE PLAYER for the kings...i think we can get the message through to the team. and the kings should look for a consistent free agent to help back up tyreke...maybe somebody like ray allen...lol sorry gus...but i'm a dreamer...
I think what the kings should do is draft wesley johnson, or monroe, or cousins for 1st round, and then they NEED to draft JARVIS VARNARDO for the 2nd round. VARNARDO has great potential, and is the best shot blocker in the country...for mississipi state, he averaged 13 pts, 10 rebounds, and 4 blocks a game, and he's just a FRESHMAN...he's a MUST HAVE for the kings because they need a solid defensive player. everybody, please help me tell all of the kings fans that VARNARDO is the MUST HAVE PLAYER for the kings...i think we can get the message through to the team. and the kings should look for a consistent free agent to help back up tyreke...maybe somebody like ray allen...lol sorry gus...but i'm a dreamer...
I thought I saw someone posted that correcting other people's spelling is not allowed in this board.
Can I also try without getting some infractions?
COMPLEMENTARY vs. COMPLIMENTARY:
com·ple·men·ta·ry
adj. 1. Forming or serving as a complement; completing.
2. Supplying mutual needs or offsetting mutual lacks.
Example:
Turner is the best complementary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( Right )
Turner is the best complimentary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( wrong )
Now back to the topic. To me we have to draft Varnado at #33 if we are drafting Monroe at #5 or if we are drafting anyone not named Cousins at #5. This will somehow make the drafting of another soft BIG or adding another SF ( which will make worse the logjam at the 3 ) more palatable.
I would like to see something different next season. I am tired of the countless threads of frustrations saying we don't have a defensive or shot blocking BIG. It actually was the main source of fans' frustration for the whole year. Let us not forget that.
Can I also try without getting some infractions?
COMPLEMENTARY vs. COMPLIMENTARY:
com·ple·men·ta·ry
adj. 1. Forming or serving as a complement; completing.
2. Supplying mutual needs or offsetting mutual lacks.
Example:
Turner is the best complementary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( Right )
Turner is the best complimentary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( wrong )
Now back to the topic. To me we have to draft Varnado at #33 if we are drafting Monroe at #5 or if we are drafting anyone not named Cousins at #5. This will somehow make the drafting of another soft BIG or adding another SF ( which will make worse the logjam at the 3 ) more palatable.
I would like to see something different next season. I am tired of the countless threads of frustrations saying we don't have a defensive or shot blocking BIG. It actually was the main source of fans' frustration for the whole year. Let us not forget that.
Last edited:
I thought I saw someone posted that correcting other people's spelling is not allowed in this board.
Can I also try without getting some infractions?
COMPLEMENTARY vs. COMPLIMENTARY:
com·ple·men·ta·ry
adj. 1. Forming or serving as a complement; completing.
2. Supplying mutual needs or offsetting mutual lacks.
Example:
Turner is the best complementary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( Right )
Turner is the best complimentary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( wrong )
Now back to the topic. To me we have to draft Varnado at #33 if we are drafting Monroe at #5 or if we are drafting anyone not named Cousins at #5. This will somehow make the drafting of another soft BIG or adding another SF ( which will make worse the logjam at the 3 ) more palatable.
I would like to see something different next season. I am tired of the countless threads of frustrations saying we don't have a defensive or shot blocking BIG. It actually was the main source of fans' frustration for the whole year. Let us not forget that.
Can I also try without getting some infractions?
COMPLEMENTARY vs. COMPLIMENTARY:
com·ple·men·ta·ry
adj. 1. Forming or serving as a complement; completing.
2. Supplying mutual needs or offsetting mutual lacks.
Example:
Turner is the best complementary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( Right )
Turner is the best complimentary player for Evans because the two will make the best 1-2 guards ( or back court ) for the Kings. ( wrong )
Now back to the topic. To me we have to draft Varnado at #33 if we are drafting Monroe at #5 or if we are drafting anyone not named Cousins at #5. This will somehow make the drafting of another soft BIG or adding another SF ( which will make worse the logjam at the 3 ) more palatable.
I would like to see something different next season. I am tired of the countless threads of frustrations saying we don't have a defensive or shot blocking BIG. It actually was the main source of fans' frustration for the whole year. Let us not forget that.
I remember last year Greg Monroe was compared to a post knee surgery Chris Webber: a top of the key big man who's best offensive weapon is either a pass or an elbow jumpshot because he can't get enough lift to score reliably in the paint. Again, not a good fit for this team. Been there, done that, still have the hangover.
I can understand the comparison on a skills level - but Monroe actually moves pretty well in every way except...up. I'd like the Kings to have a good mix of above and below the rim (Tyreke, for the most part) so if the Kings draft Monroe, I'd like them to go after a guy like Gay. That would be a pretty nicely balanced lineup.
I was just thinking that what the Kings really need is another passive big man!
oh for shame
While that article praises Petrie, and in how it praises Petrie, it also reveals that what the fans called out for/wanted often represented a weakness in the team that Petrie doesn't account for. That repeated weakness has always held back the team as a whole. Sometimes you draft the type of guy you need instead of just drafting the best guy. And if you always draft the best guy, you have to be good at making trades in order to get what you need in exchange for excess or redundant talent on your roster. Petrie is not so good at this.
Really, what does Monroe do that Hawes does not? Does he do some things a little better? (Pass) But has shown weaknesses in others (Defensive presence), but fits the same overall 'type'? And how well does that type work with the team makeup?
A good offensive big man helps you only as much as he is involved in the offense. Divac helped us, in spite of not being the greatest defender, because he initiated the offense. Pau helps the Lakers best when he is the facilitator in the offense. When Pau gets locked out (see zone D by Suns) he doesn't really impact the game. With a player like Tyreke, how involved will a Hawes/Monroe really be?
Petrie has been able to find talent in a draft, but he hasn't been able to make a team since 2002 or 2003.
oh for shame
While that article praises Petrie, and in how it praises Petrie, it also reveals that what the fans called out for/wanted often represented a weakness in the team that Petrie doesn't account for. That repeated weakness has always held back the team as a whole. Sometimes you draft the type of guy you need instead of just drafting the best guy. And if you always draft the best guy, you have to be good at making trades in order to get what you need in exchange for excess or redundant talent on your roster. Petrie is not so good at this.
Really, what does Monroe do that Hawes does not? Does he do some things a little better? (Pass) But has shown weaknesses in others (Defensive presence), but fits the same overall 'type'? And how well does that type work with the team makeup?
A good offensive big man helps you only as much as he is involved in the offense. Divac helped us, in spite of not being the greatest defender, because he initiated the offense. Pau helps the Lakers best when he is the facilitator in the offense. When Pau gets locked out (see zone D by Suns) he doesn't really impact the game. With a player like Tyreke, how involved will a Hawes/Monroe really be?
Petrie has been able to find talent in a draft, but he hasn't been able to make a team since 2002 or 2003.
The problem with Hawes is that due to physical and/or mental limitations he doesn't actually "do" anything. He's the worst type of player. A soft finesse offensive center who can't score. He has skills but they don't translate because he doesn't know how to use them. So in that sense, even though they have similar scouting reports Monroe will do everything better. He has simikar skills, but because of his body and strength can actually use them. He's got the size and length to actually play good defense. Why does everyone say he's a bad defender? He's not all world, but he's good.
As for Pau...I don't know if you're watching but he's probly the best big man in basketball now one gimmicky defense notwithstanding. For the last two playoffs he's averaging about 19 ppg 11 rpg 3apg 2bpg on 57% shooting. If Monroe can be 80% of him we should be thrilled.
As for Pau...I don't know if you're watching but he's probly the best big man in basketball now one gimmicky defense notwithstanding. For the last two playoffs he's averaging about 19 ppg 11 rpg 3apg 2bpg on 57% shooting. If Monroe can be 80% of him we should be thrilled.
I can't believe how obtuse Cousins was during them combine interviews. He looked like he wanted to kill the reporters.
"did coach talk to you about Tyreeke Evans?"
"huh? *rolls eyes* nah"
Munroe definitely came across better to me; but its about the court.
I have a horrible feeling we will pass on Cousins and he'll end up being a monster for someone.
"did coach talk to you about Tyreeke Evans?"
"huh? *rolls eyes* nah"
Munroe definitely came across better to me; but its about the court.
I have a horrible feeling we will pass on Cousins and he'll end up being a monster for someone.
How Cousins interviewed with the reporters is irrelevant. Its how he interviewed with the teams that matters. Yeah, he's not a big fan of the press. Would you be if they hammered you all year long no matter what you did. If they only told one side of the story. What makes for a better story? Cousins the bad boy, or Cousins a guy that got along with his teammates.
A long time ago Barry Bonds blew off Grant Napier when he wanted to ask him a question. Since that day Bonds has been nothing but a piece of crap as far as Napier is concerned. I've never heard him say a good word about him and he went out of his way to point out every damm thing that Bonds did wrong. So if all you did was listen to Grant, you'd think that Bonds was Atilla the Hun.
I'm not saying that Cousins doesn't have some issues, but I'am saying that they're somewhat exaggerated.
As an aside, Jerry Reynolds was on the Rise Guys show the other day and when asked about the draft and interviews, one of his comments was that its great to draft nice guys that get along with everyone. But that doesn't stop you from drafting a player thats not so nice if he's a great player. That comment had to be a reference to Cousins. Which leads me to believe that if he shows well in the workouts and is available at 5 the Kings will take him.
About Monroe he said that he was a very skilled big man and was the best passing big in the draft. He also said he had good size and was a legitimate 6'11". But he also said that he wasn't very athletic, and would probably go somewhere between 5 and 10 in the lottery.
A long time ago Barry Bonds blew off Grant Napier when he wanted to ask him a question. Since that day Bonds has been nothing but a piece of crap as far as Napier is concerned. I've never heard him say a good word about him and he went out of his way to point out every damm thing that Bonds did wrong. So if all you did was listen to Grant, you'd think that Bonds was Atilla the Hun.
I'm not saying that Cousins doesn't have some issues, but I'am saying that they're somewhat exaggerated.
As an aside, Jerry Reynolds was on the Rise Guys show the other day and when asked about the draft and interviews, one of his comments was that its great to draft nice guys that get along with everyone. But that doesn't stop you from drafting a player thats not so nice if he's a great player. That comment had to be a reference to Cousins. Which leads me to believe that if he shows well in the workouts and is available at 5 the Kings will take him.
About Monroe he said that he was a very skilled big man and was the best passing big in the draft. He also said he had good size and was a legitimate 6'11". But he also said that he wasn't very athletic, and would probably go somewhere between 5 and 10 in the lottery.
I wouldn't say it's irrelevant, that's the way the media is going to treat him for the rest of his career, he better start growing thicker skin because there's no fairness clause or anything when it comes to the NBA. The media gets to say and ask whatever the hell they want no matter whether it's exaggerated or not.
I agree that he will have to do a better job at handling the media. And I'm sure which ever team he ends up with, hopefully us, will school him in that area. What I was responding to was how his interviews would affect where he gets drafted, and I doubt the media interviews will have much effect in that area. But the team interviews are a different matter alltogether. I sincerely doubt he went in to the team interviews with the same attitude.