With the 7th pick in the 2011 NBA Draft, the Sacramento Kings select .....

[ElRey]

Brandon Knight's stock might be dropping, as he has reportedly refused to workout against competition, including the June 15th workout in Utah with Kemba Walker, Fredette. Utah is reportedly not happy about this. hmmmm...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/06/10/draft.notebook/1.html

 

[Return To Glory]

Bajaden,
I remember you mention Chandler Parsons as a prospect to look at in the second round. I did some reading on him and I'm intrigued by how he could fit on this team. He's very versatile, but do you think he can be (develop into) a reliable outside shooter and/or solid defender in the league? Could he be a good fit at "sf" on this team (as a future starter or backup)? I'm also curious why he's considered a second round prospect?

 

[Hallama]

I think Thompson is going to be a good player, but he's very raw right now. I think he can get some minutes due to his rebounding and defensive abilities, but offensively he doesn't have much game away from the basket. I was surprised when he declared for the draft. The thing is, we don't really need him, and we do need a defensive SF, and a PG that can handle the ball and shoot the ball. So I think if you have to choose between Fredette and Thompson, you go with Fredette. Ditto, Knight. Now if your choice is between Fredette and Leonard, then its a more difficult choice.

I think the Kings do need a player like Thompson - a young, athletic defensive minded PF off the bench? Who doesn't need that? He fits in nicely alongside Cousins too in the future. I love his post defense, he holds position really well and even gets some blocks in one on one situations. Good offensive rebounder, which is nice with Evans, Cousins, Thorton and (hopefully) a vet SF getting most of the shots. Also, there is no guarantee Dally will resign, and Kings are already lacking depth. Whiteside is a big wild-card.

I'm not sold on any of the SFs in the draft, maybe Singleton for his D, and I think the Kings drafting a SF is irrelevant anyway since I think they go after a vet.

Yes, I still lean toward Fredette overall, but I take Thompson over any of the SF prospects without hesitation.

 

[Kingster]

Ok, back to who Kings might draft instead of who "we" think they should pick at #7. Today Jerry Reynolds on Napear's radio show seemed to hint that Fredette was certainly in the mix and had a good workout but... I got the impression that it's still very open on who Kings take at this point. He mentioned Kawhi Leonard as next up for Kings workout and Amick is still projecting the San Diego St. small forward as Kings selection in his latest Mock Draft 2.0 at SI.com. Reynolds also mentioned two of three most likely top 10 "Euros" (his phrase) in PFs Jan Vesely and Jonas Valanciunas. He seemed to discount them a bit as having some scheduling issues and maybe not coming in for Kings workouts. He also seemed a bit mixed up on knowing where Vesely and Valanciunas were born, saying Jan was from "Czechoslovakia" instead of Czech Republic. He did not mention Kanter or Byambio (nor Walker for that matter) but it was kind of a short interview and in typical Jerry style went all over the place with lots of quips and unrelated banter. Basically, said that after top 2 or so picks it was more of a crap shoot since there was not much difference between say a #5 and a #20 or even a #30 - at least in his opinion.

I guess the question is: Who does Petrie have ranked then as #3 and #4? My guess is that it's Knight and Kemba. If one of those guys drop, they take him. If not, they probably go as much after need as anything else because the plus/minuses are so equal. Leonard, Jimmer, Singleton, Jimmer, Thompson, etc. Put the names in a hat, close your eyes, and take one.

 

[bajaden]

Bajaden,
I remember you mention Chandler Parsons as a prospect to look at in the second round. I did some reading on him and I'm intrigued by how he could fit on this team. He's very versatile, but do you think he can be (develop into) a reliable outside shooter and/or solid defender in the league? Could he be a good fit at "sf" on this team (as a future starter or backup)? I'm also curious why he's considered a second round prospect?

Right now, Parsons is a jack of all trades and a master of none. In one sense, that makes him valuable. But in another sense, it makes him a second round pick. When you take a seriousl look at Parsons, he's average at everything at the moment. He's an average athlete. Average passer, shooter, rebounder, ballhandler, etc. And yet, because he can do all those things well enough, he's intriguing. What he is above average at is basketball IQ. He's a very smart player who knows how to pick his spots.

I think there's a small chance he could slide into the bottom of the first round. All it takes is a team that thinks he has enough upside to warrant it. But at the top of the second round, I think he has very good value. He's a guy that can play a lot sooner than some of the other guys going in the first round. There is some irony in that last statement. I do think he can be a good outside shooter. He has a decent looking stroke and wasn't that bad a shooter last season.

 

[bajaden]

I think the Kings do need a player like Thompson - a young, athletic defensive minded PF off the bench? Who doesn't need that? He fits in nicely alongside Cousins too in the future. I love his post defense, he holds position really well and even gets some blocks in one on one situations. Good offensive rebounder, which is nice with Evans, Cousins, Thorton and (hopefully) a vet SF getting most of the shots. Also, there is no guarantee Dally will resign, and Kings are already lacking depth. Whiteside is a big wild-card.

I'm not sold on any of the SFs in the draft, maybe Singleton for his D, and I think the Kings drafting a SF is irrelevant anyway since I think they go after a vet.

Yes, I still lean toward Fredette overall, but I take Thompson over any of the SF prospects without hesitation.

Perhaps I bandied the word "Need" a little too loosely. Perhaps, greatest need would have been the better way to put it. I agree that resigning Dalembert isn't a given, but even so, Thompson isn't an immediate replacement for Dalembert. While he defended well last season at Texas, he's a long way from bringing what Dalembert brings. So if we lose Dalembert, the Kings would still have to look elsewhere for his replacement, whether they would draft Thompson or not.

Here's the way I look at it. At least from the prospective of need. If Dalembert does resign, then the Kings center/PF rotation is a pretty good one with Cousins, Dalembert and Thompson. Those three guys are going to get the bulk of the minutes, barring the occasional foul trouble, or injury. So you do need at least one more big man for insurance, but it has to be someone content to sit on the bench and be ready when called. Jackson fit that role last season, and its possible they'll bring him back again this season. Perhaps even Whiteside can get some minutes.

Similarly, if we resign Thornton, which is likely, then the guard rotation is fairly solid with Evans, Thornton, and Beno. But with one glaring flaw. The Kings were one of the worse teams in the league in 3 Pt shooting percentage last season. Evans was horrible shooting under 30%. Both Thornton and Beno were at 36% and under. Even worse, is the fact that Beno is a horrible 3 pt shooter off the dribble. So basicly the Kings have one guard that can shoot, and or create for himself off the dribble in Thornton, and he shot around 36% last season from behind the line. So the Kings could use another guard that can handle the ball when necessary, pass the ball, and shoot a high percentage from behind the line. When you have a low post center like Cousins, and a guard like Evans, who likes to penetrate with the ball, you need someone to help spread the floor. I see this as a greater need.

At the SF position the Kings have plenty of body's. Each one brings something a little different, but not one of them has brought enough to the table to lock up the position. Cisco won the job mostly by default. I like Cisco, but he is what he is. But what he isn't, is a starting SF on a playoff team. Cisco isn't big enough or strong enough to match up with the bigger, stronger SF's in the league, and when switched to the SG position, he isn't quick enough to guard most of them effectively. I think Cisco maximizes his potential, but he should be coming off the bench.

With both Greene and Casspi, your still talking about potential. Not a good thing for a guy like Greene going into his 4th year. Talk is cheap Donte, time for results. Big year for Casspi, if he's still with the team this next season. But the bottom line is, do the Kings want to go through another season with the same uncertainy. This is the year to make a move up the rankings. So its a big gamble to bet on that threesome as the answer. By the same token, its a big gamble to bet on an unproven rookie, if we were to draft one. The default option at SF is the weakest of any postion. Which is why I think they go veteran player here. I think a player like Leonard would have to really impress the Kings brass to become the top consideration. I'm not sure that could be done in a team workout.

So I think the Kings go PG, or Combo guard, whatever you want to call it. I still think Knight is the first choice, but I believe they'll take Fredette over Walker, simply because Walker doesn't address their biggest need. High percentage shooting from behind the 3 pt line.

 

[Hallama]

Thompson wouldn't be a replacement for Dalembert, just more PF depth with the possibility of becoming an Ant Davis type down the road. If the Kings lose Dalembert, I'd expect them to go after Pryzbilla if he's healthy. Drafting Thompson would be more of a statement that Petrie didn't like any of the guards or Euro's in this draft.

Definitely an interesting draft for the Kings, baja. Draftexpress now has the Kings taking Fredette at 7 and passing on Vesely. The Kings are going to have to make some interesting choices this year. I believe that they are sold on Fredette.

 

[KingsInBrazil]

Imo we should trade down for a vet... and get someone like Marshon Brooks to score off the bench... Omri Casspi, #7 and either Beno/Garcia for Inguodala and 76ers #16 or Granger and Pacers #15 sounds fair to me...

 

[bajaden]

Thompson wouldn't be a replacement for Dalembert, just more PF depth with the possibility of becoming an Ant Davis type down the road. If the Kings lose Dalembert, I'd expect them to go after Pryzbilla if he's healthy. Drafting Thompson would be more of a statement that Petrie didn't like any of the guards or Euro's in this draft.

Definitely an interesting draft for the Kings, baja. Draftexpress now has the Kings taking Fredette at 7 and passing on Vesely. The Kings are going to have to make some interesting choices this year. I believe that they are sold on Fredette.

I don't think the Kings are interested in drafting another 19 year old if they can avoid it. I think they would prefer to draft a player thats less of a project. Thats why I think they're leaning toward either Fredette or Walker. Fredette was a senior and Walker was a junior. I happen to think Fredette is the better fit, but I can understand either being picked. In general, with 18 and 19 year olds you also get immaturity, and I think they have thier quota of that on the team already.

 

[Hallama]

I don't think the Kings are interested in drafting another 19 year old if they can avoid it. I think they would prefer to draft a player thats less of a project. Thats why I think they're leaning toward either Fredette or Walker. Fredette was a senior and Walker was a junior. I happen to think Fredette is the better fit, but I can understand either being picked. In general, with 18 and 19 year olds you also get immaturity, and I think they have thier quota of that on the team already.

I understand what you're saying, but Thompson is actually 20. A year older than most in his class, but still with only one year of college ball. I didn't realize that until today, not that it would change my mind about him being a solid pick at 7.

Fredette: just love his jumper. I'd be happy just to see him come in at the end of quarter situations and shoot 30 footers.

 

[jcwkings]

Jimmer has to be the pick. just fits our need too much not to take him. We don't need projects that can become good in 5 years. If petrie is convinced tyreke and cousins will be our big 2, jimmer is a great piece to put around both of them. our gaurd core would be tyreke, thornton, jimmer, beno. thats a very good versatile core, maybe lacking in defense but thats what guys like garcia and greene can bring on the wings. The tryeke drive and kick to jimmer, as well as pick and rolls with cousins/thompson/dalembert could be deadly. I think this team showed down the stretch last year that they're ready to make a push to 2nd to 3rd tier team in the leauge. we have our stars, we just need them to fully develop and add the right pieces around them.

 

[Entity]

well draftexpress has jumped on the jimmer to kings bandwagon. they have had leonard to us the whole time. now jimmer.

 

[Glenn]

well draftexpress has jumped on the jimmer to kings bandwagon. they have had leonard to us the whole time. now jimmer.

And they have Kanter at #6. Interesting as my pure, unadulterated fascination with Jimmer and Kanter would cause my head to sizzle in indecision if Kanter slipped one spot further and made us chose between Kanter and Jimmer. I know that people may downplay Kanter because he isn't working out with many teams and we know so little. Still .....

 

[ElRey]

Jimmer has to be the pick. just fits our need too much not to take him. We don't need projects that can become good in 5 years. If petrie is convinced tyreke and cousins will be our big 2, jimmer is a great piece to put around both of them. our gaurd core would be tyreke, thornton, jimmer, beno. thats a very good versatile core, maybe lacking in defense but thats what guys like garcia and greene can bring on the wings. The tryeke drive and kick to jimmer, as well as pick and rolls with cousins/thompson/dalembert could be deadly. I think this team showed down the stretch last year that they're ready to make a push to 2nd to 3rd tier team in the leauge. we have our stars, we just need them to fully develop and add the right pieces around them.

Agreed that we don't need anymore projects. We need players that can contribute NOW.

 

[ElRey]

And they have Kanter at #6. Interesting as my pure, unadulterated fascination with Jimmer and Kanter would cause my head to sizzle in indecision if Kanter slipped one spot further and made us chose between Kanter and Jimmer. I know that people may downplay Kanter because he isn't working out with many teams and we know so little. Still .....

I'd take Kanter in a heart beat. He's going to be long gone before we pick, though stranger things have happened on draft night.

 

[PurpleHaze]

I'd take Kanter in a heart beat. He's going to be long gone before we pick, though stranger things have happened on draft night.

I think I agree. Skilled big men like Kanter are so hard to find with shooters as amazingly gifted as Fredetter is, not nearly as rare a breed. The only hesitation is Kanter is soooo young and do we really want another teenager as good as he might be or become at #7? Fredette is older and seems quite mature and looks like a marketing dream for Kings franchise. But if Daly is gone, Kanter looks like an instant immediate needs pick. The smart selection might be Kanter just because in 2012 draft there will be more shooters around and of course another "nations leading scorer" out there for possible drafting. But in the end Kanter probably won't be sitting there at #7 to give Petrie pause...

 

[KingsCitizen]

I'm getting warm on the Jimmer at #7.
Petrie did pick JT at #12, who was supposed to be late first round on that draft. So if he likes the kid and knows that there's no other way we can grab him on a later pick or a trade down then "To Petrie I Trust".

 

[bajaden]

I don't think it'll come down to Jimmer or Kanter. I can think of two teams ahead of us that would take Kanter. And if they don't, then a giant red flag goes up for me. But my golden rule is, if I have to choose between a very good big man and a very good little man, I always take the big man. Their just harder to find.

 

[rainmaker]

Apparently Walker didn't impress much in todays workout. Didn't finish layups, jumper wasn't impressive, and had trouble defending.

 

[hrdboild]

It did seem inevitable that Jimmer would be moved up to our pick on the mock drafts after the glowing workout reports because he's such a classic Geoff Petrie player. His skill shooting the ball is the best in this draft and it's not even close. Added to that he's also crafty enough off the dribble to get to the basket so he's going to be a nightmare to guard on pick and rolls from day one. I can already picture him in a Kings uniform playing his game because it's such a natural fit.

That being said, I have one problem with Jimmer, and it's a big one -- his defense is Mike Bibby bad. When I've seen him play there's no question he's the worst defender on his team. His awareness of floor positioning coming around screens is really bad, he just takes himself out of the play far too often. He doesn't get in a good defensive stance either so his lateral quickness is wasted and he often closes out with his arms down which doesn't adequately challenge the shot. I understand the motivation to stay out of foul trouble, but the end goal is always to win the game and his non-existant presence on defense was not helping his team win.

There's been some speculation that his athletic numbers at the combine debunk the slow/can't play defense myth, but for me they make it even more troubling. If his lateral quickness is every bit as good as Brandon Knight's, why is he getting beat so easily man-to-man? And I think the answer is that he just doesn't have the will to play defense -- at least not at the college level. And a guy that won't play defense is worse to me than a guy who's effort is there but he lacks the athleticism to keep up. I've never had a coach tell me not to play defense.

Contrast that with Harrison Barnes, former consensus number 1 pick and expected one-and-done prospect at North Carolina. He was also a big part of his team's offense but I saw him playing defense on every possession-- and he was a freshman. That's actually what impressed me about him the most as a player. There's always a chance for guys to improve their defensive awareness through good coaching, but at some point you have to ask yourself if it's reasonable to expect something of a player which has never been there in the first place.

So while I think he's a high level point guard prospect on offense -- where he does put his athleticism to good use-- I ultimately see him as purely a one way player. And his shooting skill is elite, I have no question about that. But if Tyreke develops his perimeter shot like he should and we bring in a competent shooter at the SF position, with Thornton in the mix somewhere too is shooting really all that big of a need going forward? Enough so to pass on players who provide help in other areas which are more needed (rebounding and defense)? To me the answer is no. The talk the past two drafts was that Geoff was changing his MO and targeting toughness over offensive finesse. If he's serious about building a better defensive team there will be guys available at our #7 pick who would be better fits.

 

[rainmaker]

It did seem inevitable that Jimmer would be moved up to our pick on the mock drafts after the glowing workout reports because he's such a classic Geoff Petrie player. His skill shooting the ball is the best in this draft and it's not even close. Added to that he's also crafty enough off the dribble to get to the basket so he's going to be a nightmare to guard on pick and rolls from day one. I can already picture him in a Kings uniform playing his game because it's such a natural fit.

That being said, I have one problem with Jimmer, and it's a big one -- his defense is Mike Bibby bad. When I've seen him play there's no question he's the worst defender on his team. His awareness of floor positioning coming around screens is really bad, he just takes himself out of the play far too often. He doesn't get in a good defensive stance either so his lateral quickness is wasted and he often closes out with his arms down which doesn't adequately challenge the shot. I understand the motivation to stay out of foul trouble, but the end goal is always to win the game and his non-existant presence on defense was not helping his team win.

There's been some speculation that his athletic numbers at the combine debunk the slow/can't play defense myth, but for me they make it even more troubling. If his lateral quickness is every bit as good as Brandon Knight's, why is he getting beat so easily man-to-man? And I think the answer is that he just doesn't have the will to play defense -- at least not at the college level. And a guy that won't play defense is worse to me than a guy who's effort is there but he lacks the athleticism to keep up. I've never had a coach tell me not to play defense.

Contrast that with Harrison Barnes, former consensus number 1 pick and expected one-and-done prospect at North Carolina. He was also a big part of his team's offense but I saw him playing defense on every possession-- and he was a freshman. That's actually what impressed me about him the most as a player. There's always a chance for guys to improve their defensive awareness through good coaching, but at some point you have to ask yourself if it's reasonable to expect something of a player which has never been there in the first place.

So while I think he's a high level point guard prospect on offense -- where he does put his athleticism to good use-- I ultimately see him as purely a one way player. And his shooting skill is elite, I have no question about that. But if Tyreke develops his perimeter shot like he should and we bring in a competent shooter at the SF position, with Thornton in the mix somewhere too is shooting really all that big of a need going forward? Enough so to pass on players who provide help in other areas which are more needed (rebounding and defense)? To me the answer is no. The talk the past two drafts was that Geoff was changing his MO and targeting toughness over offensive finesse. If he's serious about building a better defensive team there will be guys available at our #7 pick who would be better fits.

Then what's your opinion on the well known fact both Jimmer and his coach, as well as many analysts, have admitted he was specifically asked NOT to play defense, and conserve his energy for the other end, as BYU had no other talent? So he was told not to play defense, as he was their only offense and regularly played huge minutes, and his combine tests show he is one of the more athletic guard in the daft, yet you seem positive he can't play any defense, and is a lock to be a one-way player.

Don't get it.

 

[BMiller52]

Apparently Walker didn't impress much in todays workout. Didn't finish layups, jumper wasn't impressive, and had trouble defending.

Link?

 

[hrdboild]

Then what's your opinion on the well known fact both Jimmer and his coach, as well as many analysts, have admitted he was specifically asked NOT to play defense, and conserve his energy for the other end, as BYU had no other talent? So he was told not to play defense, as he was their only offense and regularly played huge minutes, and his combine tests show he is one of the more athletic guard in the daft, yet you seem positive he can't play any defense, and is a lock to be a one-way player.

Don't get it.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I answered that already. But to elaborate, I'm skeptical to what extent what I saw on the floor was the product of Jimmer avoiding fouls as opposed to simply poor defensive fundamentals. And even if I did ever find myself in a position where a coach specifically told me not to play defense, I would have to ignore them as I think any good player would because defense is 50% of the game. If you save your energy on defense half the time, are you really going all out the other half of the time? Probably not. Bad habits carry over whether you like them to or not. He could carry his team to wins on shooting alone in college, but that's not going to work in the NBA and his defensive assignments are only going to get harder. I'm not trying to character assassinate the guy. His attitude seems like one of his best attributes and if he's already identified defense as a weakness and he's working on it, than he could get there because athleticism is not the problem. I'm skeptical though and I think I have a legitimate reason to be. Athleticism alone isn't enough to make anyone a good defender.

 

[Glenn]

Actually, I'm pretty sure I answered that already. But to elaborate, I'm skeptical to what extent what I saw on the floor was the product of Jimmer avoiding fouls as opposed to simply poor defensive fundamentals. And even if I did ever find myself in a position where a coach specifically told me not to play defense, I would have to ignore them as I think any good player would because defense is 50% of the game. If you save your energy on defense half the time, are you really going all out the other half of the time? Probably not. Bad habits carry over whether you like them to or not. He could carry his team to wins on shooting alone in college, but that's not going to work in the NBA and his defensive assignments are only going to get harder. I'm not trying to character assassinate the guy. His attitude seems like one of his best attributes and if he's already identified defense as a weakness and he's working on it, than he could get there because athleticism is not the problem. I'm skeptical though and I think I have a legitimate reason to be. Athleticism alone isn't enough to make anyone a good defender.

We can't know for sure until he plays more limited minutes in the NBA. Certainly it theoretically is possible he can play some defense but we can't know for sure how much.

That doubles down on the idea that we absolutely need to resign Dally and we need a defensive minded SF and if we have Jimmer, I think it takes a bit of pressure off the need of a SF that can shoot threes. I don't want him to be impotent but defense is the major need at the 3 position.

 

[=LarryLegend=]

If we draft Jimmer I wonder if Christie would work with him during the lockout, def could help his defensive game!

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I know everyone is saying that it is unlikely that Kanter will drop to us, and I agree .. but if you look at Draft Express latest mock draft, they have Kanter going one spot ahead of us to the Wizards. Kawhi Leonard has been linked to the Wizards in a lot of other Mock's .. So there is always the chance they go with Leonard over Kanter dropping him to 7.

Unlikely, sure. But not impossible. In fact, I'd say he has a better chance of dropping to 7 then Knight does, but we will see.

 

[bajaden]

It did seem inevitable that Jimmer would be moved up to our pick on the mock drafts after the glowing workout reports because he's such a classic Geoff Petrie player. His skill shooting the ball is the best in this draft and it's not even close. Added to that he's also crafty enough off the dribble to get to the basket so he's going to be a nightmare to guard on pick and rolls from day one. I can already picture him in a Kings uniform playing his game because it's such a natural fit.

That being said, I have one problem with Jimmer, and it's a big one -- his defense is Mike Bibby bad. When I've seen him play there's no question he's the worst defender on his team. His awareness of floor positioning coming around screens is really bad, he just takes himself out of the play far too often. He doesn't get in a good defensive stance either so his lateral quickness is wasted and he often closes out with his arms down which doesn't adequately challenge the shot. I understand the motivation to stay out of foul trouble, but the end goal is always to win the game and his non-existant presence on defense was not helping his team win.

There's been some speculation that his athletic numbers at the combine debunk the slow/can't play defense myth, but for me they make it even more troubling. If his lateral quickness is every bit as good as Brandon Knight's, why is he getting beat so easily man-to-man? And I think the answer is that he just doesn't have the will to play defense -- at least not at the college level. And a guy that won't play defense is worse to me than a guy who's effort is there but he lacks the athleticism to keep up. I've never had a coach tell me not to play defense.

Contrast that with Harrison Barnes, former consensus number 1 pick and expected one-and-done prospect at North Carolina. He was also a big part of his team's offense but I saw him playing defense on every possession-- and he was a freshman. That's actually what impressed me about him the most as a player. There's always a chance for guys to improve their defensive awareness through good coaching, but at some point you have to ask yourself if it's reasonable to expect something of a player which has never been there in the first place.

So while I think he's a high level point guard prospect on offense -- where he does put his athleticism to good use-- I ultimately see him as purely a one way player. And his shooting skill is elite, I have no question about that. But if Tyreke develops his perimeter shot like he should and we bring in a competent shooter at the SF position, with Thornton in the mix somewhere too is shooting really all that big of a need going forward? Enough so to pass on players who provide help in other areas which are more needed (rebounding and defense)? To me the answer is no. The talk the past two drafts was that Geoff was changing his MO and targeting toughness over offensive finesse. If he's serious about building a better defensive team there will be guys available at our #7 pick who would be better fits.

OK! I've posted this twice already, but I'll post it one more time and thats it. I saw an interview with Jimmer's coach at BYU. In the interview he was asked about Jimmer's poor defense. He admitted, that he told Jimmer to not waste energy on defense, and particularly not to get into foul trouble. He said that his team couldn't afford to not have Jimmer on the floor. Particularly since Jimmer handled the ball about 80% of the time on offense, and at times played the entire 40 minutes. He said BYU played a zone because it was easier to hide Jimmer on defense.

I later listened to a podcast with Chad Ford, who teaches a class at BYU, and knows Fredette well as a result. He varified exactly what the coach said in the interview. So Jimmer's poor defense was by design, and had nothing to do with desire. If you know anything about Fredette at all, you know he's a competitor. He just purposely rearranged his schedule with Utah, so he could be there the same day as Walker to go head to head with him. Does that sound like a guy that doesn't have the will to play defense.

Look, I'm not saying that Fredette is suddenly going to be a great defensive player. I'am saying that there was a reason he was a poor defender at BYU. And it had nothing to do with will, or athleticism. It had everything to do with keeping him in the game.

 

[Spike]

And even if I did ever find myself in a position where a coach specifically told me not to play defense, I would have to ignore them as I think any good player would because defense is 50% of the game.

And man, if my player got into foul trouble because he/she didn't listen to my directions about not picking up fouls...Ignoring the coach gets you in a heap of trouble.

If I need someone on the offensive end, I sure as hell don't want them on the bench because of foul trouble. Zones are an easy way to keep that from being too obvious. Is his coach covering for him? Maybe. Maybe not, but I don't think it's as big a deal as you want to make it to be. Bibby's D got us a Kobe-Elbow away from the Finals, if you want to look at it that way. We can make up for it in other places.

 

[Glenn]

Nobody can say that Jimmer doesn't have desire. He's a competitor and I suspect has always been questioned because of his size, religion, and color, frankly. 6'2" Mormons aren't supposed to be good. I suspect there is a degree of "I'll show you" in him that will translate into defense that is good enough. That's all he needs to be - good enough. He seems much quicker than Bibby was although perhaps my memory is blurred by seeing an older Bibby on the court.

He's the anti-Greene if you catch what I am saying. Greene is tall and athletic and seems satisfied with that. I doubt if Jimmer will ever be satisfied with his game. You don't want your whole team sitting on the bench with foul trouble and Jimmer was the whole BYU team. That's an excuse I suppose but I am trying to say that his personalty is such that I don't expect him to be a defensive disaster.

 

[KingsCitizen]

And by the way, Dallas just bagged the NBA Champs trophy, playing mostly zone and team defense. And they have a defenseless little Barea on their starting line-up inserted purely for offense. Well, I don't think having a 6'2" offensive weapon is worse than a 5'8" J.J. Barea.