Ben McLemore
- Thread starter HereWeBoogie
- Start date
If ever one pick could reinvigorate a fanbase this could be it. The energy on the board and from the post-draft calls on khtk are/were palpable. Many consider him the top talent in the draft. At 7, your thinking of picking a quality role player, but fortunately in a weak draft we ended up with potentially more.
Welcome to Sactown Ben
Welcome to Sactown Ben
Where do we start?
Wes Johnson came into the league several years older than pretty much everyone else in his draft class as a relatively small SF who came out of a notoriously skewed college system that generally ignored defense. Wes Johnson was essentially a 'safe' pick by Kahn in that he did not have the upside of his peers in the draft. In BMac's case, most pundits have him marked as the one player in this year's draft with the most star potential because he (a) runs and jumps like someone lit his sneakers on fire, (b) shoots like a pro wingman, (c) shows great defensive instincts, and (d) is only 20 years old.
Wes Johnson came into the league several years older than pretty much everyone else in his draft class as a relatively small SF who came out of a notoriously skewed college system that generally ignored defense. Wes Johnson was essentially a 'safe' pick by Kahn in that he did not have the upside of his peers in the draft. In BMac's case, most pundits have him marked as the one player in this year's draft with the most star potential because he (a) runs and jumps like someone lit his sneakers on fire, (b) shoots like a pro wingman, (c) shows great defensive instincts, and (d) is only 20 years old.
Ouch.
There is some truth in that though. He's much younger obviously, for one. But especially on the "could be a star" scale, dunking and spot shooting aren't star traits per se. For all that people around here don't seem to get it, the sine qua non of star guards is great ballhandling ability. Just start running through the Western Conference and every single guard you encounter that could be called a star is able to create for himself. Actually so obvious it hardly needs to be said. So if that is McLemore's weakness, stardom may not be the future. You can learn to shoot late. But you rarely become a vastly better ballhandler. That's probably something that comes from little toddlers going everywhere bouncing a ball their entire life. On the other hand the Wesley Johnson thing was a bait of an aberration in just how hard he busted. Late breaking old senior who had one big year in a questionable system. McLemore may not turn out to be a star, but in theory at least a guy who shoots, dunks and defends, but doesn't handle, is actually a great support player for star guys.
There is some truth in that though. He's much younger obviously, for one. But especially on the "could be a star" scale, dunking and spot shooting aren't star traits per se. For all that people around here don't seem to get it, the sine qua non of star guards is great ballhandling ability. Just start running through the Western Conference and every single guard you encounter that could be called a star is able to create for himself. Actually so obvious it hardly needs to be said. So if that is McLemore's weakness, stardom may not be the future. You can learn to shoot late. But you rarely become a vastly better ballhandler. That's probably something that comes from little toddlers going everywhere bouncing a ball their entire life. On the other hand the Wesley Johnson thing was a bait of an aberration in just how hard he busted. Late breaking old senior who had one big year in a questionable system. McLemore may not turn out to be a star, but in theory at least a guy who shoots, dunks and defends, but doesn't handle, is actually a great support player for star guys.
Last edited:
admittedly, the question was born out of bitterness over just having missed Noel and the weariness coming with a falling Kansas prospect Scott Pollard says might not be as good as you'd like to think and it wasn't really all that serious. it worries me though that of your a,b,c,d thing only d) doesn't apply to Johnson as well.
Agreed with Brick on all counts, but seriously guys, stop listening to Scot Pollard on prospects. He was [apparently] right about Robinson - it doesn't make him an expert or a fortune teller. With all due respect, we all love Scot, but he's goofy and I wouldn't be listening to his evaluations of draft prospects.
Really I don't see a way for McLemore to bust. Now he may never reach star heights, but someone with his size for SG, elite athleticism (and it is elite, any doubters will have to wait and see or trust me on this one), and his shooting ability... The generally don't bust. At the very least you'll have someone who can knock down jumpers and get out on the break. He also shows promise defensively. Personally I think his ballhandling isn't as big a problem as his confidence/assertiveness. At times he showed some ballhandling - the problem for me was that he rarely ever seemed to try to attack off the dribble. Which means he either wasn't asked to do so, or didn't have the confidence to. Either way, it can be improved upon.
We don't even need him to be a star. If he is one, great. But I'll take the athletic, sweet-shooting, full-sized SG next to Tyreke every day of the week. Especially if he plays good defense, which Ben is more than capable of. That's what creates mismatches. They put their PG on Reke, he can physically bully him all game long. Switch him to McLemore and he can shoot over him til his hearts content.
Really I don't see a way for McLemore to bust. Now he may never reach star heights, but someone with his size for SG, elite athleticism (and it is elite, any doubters will have to wait and see or trust me on this one), and his shooting ability... The generally don't bust. At the very least you'll have someone who can knock down jumpers and get out on the break. He also shows promise defensively. Personally I think his ballhandling isn't as big a problem as his confidence/assertiveness. At times he showed some ballhandling - the problem for me was that he rarely ever seemed to try to attack off the dribble. Which means he either wasn't asked to do so, or didn't have the confidence to. Either way, it can be improved upon.
We don't even need him to be a star. If he is one, great. But I'll take the athletic, sweet-shooting, full-sized SG next to Tyreke every day of the week. Especially if he plays good defense, which Ben is more than capable of. That's what creates mismatches. They put their PG on Reke, he can physically bully him all game long. Switch him to McLemore and he can shoot over him til his hearts content.
McLemore is a great pick. He spreads the floor. He defends. He's very athletic. He is a prototypical 2-guard. The Kings org values that. It's insulting to talk about this kid being a "support player." Laughable actually.
Cousins should love this pick. There is chemistry with this pick.
The only major concern is immaturity. Like I said before, if the Maloofs were the owners, I'd have my doubts, just like I had when Cousins was drafted by the weak Kings organization headed by the Maloofs. Weak organizations and immature players don't mix very well. Throwing McLemore into the Maloofian world of weakness, coddling, inconsistency and toxicity would not be a great recipe for success. I am much more hopeful with Vivek, DA and Malone that they will support, guide and advise this kid in a wise manner and surround him with real professionals that play basketball with the proper work ethic, maturity, coachability, and attention to detail. My guess is that the Kings are going to be focusing from here on out getting those type of veterans to mold the culture of this team. And it's not just who they add to the team; it's who they subtract. They are going scrutinize very carefully every veteran member of the current roster to see if he passes muster.
Cousins should love this pick. There is chemistry with this pick.
The only major concern is immaturity. Like I said before, if the Maloofs were the owners, I'd have my doubts, just like I had when Cousins was drafted by the weak Kings organization headed by the Maloofs. Weak organizations and immature players don't mix very well. Throwing McLemore into the Maloofian world of weakness, coddling, inconsistency and toxicity would not be a great recipe for success. I am much more hopeful with Vivek, DA and Malone that they will support, guide and advise this kid in a wise manner and surround him with real professionals that play basketball with the proper work ethic, maturity, coachability, and attention to detail. My guess is that the Kings are going to be focusing from here on out getting those type of veterans to mold the culture of this team. And it's not just who they add to the team; it's who they subtract. They are going scrutinize very carefully every veteran member of the current roster to see if he passes muster.
Oh dear Lord. No one is saying he can't be more than that. But if you're going to annoint him the second coming then you're going to get a shock. He has a huge amount of talent, but also some question marks. I don't recall you ever making such a sure comment about him before the Kings drafted him, so you might want to take a look at your bias. McLemore could be a star. But he's going to need to improve his ballhandling significantly if that's to happen. If he doesn't turn out to be a star, then yes, he should be a good support player. I don't know what you're up in arms over. I've been a fan of his all year, but he's not a sure thing in terms of being a star.
If you're not superstitious then why would him being from UK scare you? Doesn't exactly make sense...
There's some legit doubts about McLemore, but being from UK isn't one of them. UK doesn't have the best record with producing NBA players, but you can't write him off due to that. His strengths are obvious.
Last edited:
Yeah, but if you're going all the way back to Wilt you know it's not looking good. Pierce is the last all-star they produced, and even he isn't a superstar. They usually produce role players, not stars. That doesn't mean McLemore won't be one, but that's not the point I was trying to make.
BTW, we're talking about UK, not KS. Gary got me all mixed up on that, but I was talking about UK.
Paul Pierce was a superstar in Boston and was paid like one. Please don't have me make further list of outstanding KU (it's always KU for Kansas - UK for Kentucky) as it's longer than you apparently think - plus they've made 14 Final Four appearances in their history which has resulted in many star and several superstar NBA players produced.
says the guy who remains laughably convinced that tyreke evans will not become a star, despite a proven level of production, a rate of improvement, and a ceiling that suggests the all-star game is hardly out of reach...
ben mclemore may become something more than a support player, but as of right now, he's bringing elite shooting to the nba, and great athleticism, on top of what appears to be a pesky defensive streak (we'll see how that translates to the superior competition in the nba). but he's got a weak handle and little in the way of a rim attack, two traits most commonly associated with star guards in the nba. mclemore reads like klay thompson at this point. again, he could very well become a star someday, but that's no more of a guarantee than it is with any player in this particular draft, and you expose your bias when you claim that mclemore is not a support player, while having repeatedly bashed tyreke evans as nothing more than the same elsewhere...
ben mclemore may become something more than a support player, but as of right now, he's bringing elite shooting to the nba, and great athleticism, on top of what appears to be a pesky defensive streak (we'll see how that translates to the superior competition in the nba). but he's got a weak handle and little in the way of a rim attack, two traits most commonly associated with star guards in the nba. mclemore reads like klay thompson at this point. again, he could very well become a star someday, but that's no more of a guarantee than it is with any player in this particular draft, and you expose your bias when you claim that mclemore is not a support player, while having repeatedly bashed tyreke evans as nothing more than the same elsewhere...
Last edited:
FYI, never call it UK when referring to Kansas. Kentucky and Kansas fans both will rip you a new one.
http://www.ku.edu/
http://www.uky.edu/
http://www.ku.edu/
http://www.uky.edu/
Is there something wrong with you? Pierce was never on the level of a true superstar like Durant, Kobe, LeBron. He may have been paid like one, but Boston sucked for a long time and he was NOT a superstar. And you really need to look at the list of players the came from KU (my mistake) who have made it to the NBA. Lots of solid players, one or two star level players (excluding Wilt who was obviously a superstar). That's it. If you want to make a list, go ahead. I have no idea who these other star players you're seeing are. Hinrich? Pollard? Gooden? Give me a break. I don't even know why you're debating this as it's not really relevant to McLemore. He's the best prospect they've had in a long time. If you'd like to prove me wrong, just a simple list of these superstars and star players will suffice, won't take you long, you don't even have to address the rest of my post. Easy peasy.
Relax, it's an easy mistake. Only pointed it out because I inadvertently wrote Kansas State instead of KU in my first post (two different colleges).
says the guy who remains laughably convinced that tyreke evans will not become a star, despite a proven level of production, a rate of improvement, and a ceiling that suggests the all-star game is hardly out of reach...
ben mclemore may become something more than a support player, but as of right now, he's bringing elite shooting to the nba, and great athleticism, on top of what appears to be a pesky defensive streak (we'll see how that translates to the superior competition in the nba). but he's got a weak handle and little in the way of a rim attack, two traits most commonly associated with star guards in the nba. mclemore reads like klay thompson at this point. again, he could very well become a star someday, but that's no more of a guarantee than it is with any player in this particular draft, and you expose your bias when you claim that mclemore is not a support player, while having repeatedly bashed tyreke evans as nothing more than the same elsewhere...
ben mclemore may become something more than a support player, but as of right now, he's bringing elite shooting to the nba, and great athleticism, on top of what appears to be a pesky defensive streak (we'll see how that translates to the superior competition in the nba). but he's got a weak handle and little in the way of a rim attack, two traits most commonly associated with star guards in the nba. mclemore reads like klay thompson at this point. again, he could very well become a star someday, but that's no more of a guarantee than it is with any player in this particular draft, and you expose your bias when you claim that mclemore is not a support player, while having repeatedly bashed tyreke evans as nothing more than the same elsewhere...
I get that you're nervous about the possibility of Tyreke no longer being a King, but there's no need to go off the deep end because of it.
Actually, it's pretty simple. You have your star players and your support players. Either you see McLemore as a star or a support player. It's not rocket science and all you're doing is avoiding the points made to you.
Personally I don't know which he'll be. He has the talent to be a star, of that I'm sure, but if he's not, I'm sure he'll be a good support player. You said it's a joke that someone could see him as a support player. If he's not that, surely you see him as a star? If not, then please clarify! It's not that difficult!