Ben McLemore

[Gary]

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/

I didn't call it KU. I just said that we had two picks that fell to our laps from KS (state abbreviation). I figured that he would have got the joke based on knowing where Robinson came from, and how he fell into our laps as well. But I guess I confused people for some reason.... Not sure how, since Robinson and McLemore both played for the same school and both of them fell into our laps after being projected much higher.

Ugh.. It's a lot less funny when I have to explain everything.

 

[roasthawg]

Didn't want McLemore pre-draft but I think we have smart people running things for us and I trust them... so I'm thinking best case with McLemore, especially considering we tried to trade up for him. I'll hope for a Ray Allen or maybe a Vince Carter and we'll see what happens... he definitely brings shooting and athleticism, that much is undeniable.

 

[Dime Dropper]

I didn't call it KU. I just said that we had two picks that fell to our laps from KS (state abbreviation). I figured that he would have got the joke based on knowing where Robinson came from, and how he fell into our laps as well. But I guess I confused people for some reason.... Not sure how, since Robinson and McLemore both played for the same school and both of them fell into our laps after being projected much higher.

Ugh.. It's a lot less funny when I have to explain everything.

You didn't really confuse people, you just made me (you didn't make me, but you know what I mean) write KS instead of KU. Kansas State (KS) is a pretty big school as well as KU, which is why I clarified my earlier mistake, which I picked up from you. You were using it as the state abbreviation but it's also the name of another college (where guys like Beasley came from). It's not a big deal and I did get your joke, I just wasn't sure if you were actually joking. Some people take the superstition thing seriously, and you struck me as someone that might (no offense intended).

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

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.

Wes Johnson? lol

Not all shooting ability is created equal. There are varying degrees of creativity as a shooter. Wes Johnson could barely hit a spot up jumper being set up by Ricky Rubio.

I'm laughing at all of the "3 and D" insinuations about McLemore. As if he's Bruce Bowen who we're going to park in the corner and ask to shoot when the ball comes to him. No, not at all. McLemore is a much more creative force. Maybe not with the ball in his hands, but running off the ball, coming off a screen, corkscrewing towards the basket, rising straight up and draining a shot is a talent not many players are blessed with. Playing effectively without the ball is a valuable skill. And he has good instincts. He reads screens and can determine the correct basketball play, whether to spot up in a corner or to hit the screener with a pocket pass. These type of players aren't just the beneficiaries of a defense that has been bent by other players; these players actually bend the defense themselves.

Of course, as a #1 option, off-the-ball type of scorers get snuffed out pretty easily. Probably even as a #2 option. But as a #3 guy next to, say, Evans and Cousins? McLemore is going to have a field day. If Tyreke can man the PG at even a decent level, we could potentially have him and McLemore as starters with Isaiah off the bench. Thats a fantastic 3 guard rotation.

If you look across NBA history, McLemore compares favorably to some of the better 3rd option types around. Ray Allen with the Celtics. Reggie Miller with the Pacers. Alan Houston with the Knicks. Peja with the Kings. I'll take it and run.

 

[Padrino]

Absolutely pathological. Do you comprehend that relegating McLemore as a "support player" is not ipso facto saying that McLemore is a star player? Unbelievable.

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.

not really. there are stars. and there are support players. there may be the slightest shade of gray between them on a very rare occasion, but that's hardly germane when discussing an unproven player. see, there's tim duncan and tony parker (stars), then there's danny green and kawhi leonard (support players). there's lebron james and dwayne wade (stars), then there's shane battier and ray allen (support players). there's steph curry (star) and david lee (borderline star--here's where that slight gray area occasionally comes into play), and there's andrew bogut and klay thompson (support players). now, you can be a high-level support player, and i fully expect mclemore to become at least that, but the nba is at all times a hierarchy. your stars are at the top, and just about everyone beneath them plays a supporting role. it's not terribly complicated, as there's only one ball to go around...

but yes, i've been very open about exposing my anxiety regarding the possibility of tyreke evans leaving in free agency. i'm not going off the deep end, but i do always appreciate an opportunity to expose your ridiculousness. and for the record, it is quite ridiculous to criticize posters for insinuating that ben mclemore's skill set, which remains unproven as of yet in the nba, is best-suited to a support role, while criticizing the same posters for insinuating that tyreke evans' proven level of production and growth in the nba suggests an all-star trajectory...

 

[JB_kings]

I didn't call it KU. I just said that we had two picks that fell to our laps from KS (state abbreviation). I figured that he would have got the joke based on knowing where Robinson came from, and how he fell into our laps as well. But I guess I confused people for some reason.... Not sure how, since Robinson and McLemore both played for the same school and both of them fell into our laps after being projected much higher.

Ugh.. It's a lot less funny when I have to explain everything.

I gotcha. I made the mistake once of mixing up the KU/UK thing with Kentucky Wildcat fans once. Same reaction as if someone called our team the Sacramento Lakers.

 

[Gary]

I know I have been promoting this guy but there is another out there who is pretty good at moving without the basketball who plays SF. He's hidden on Denver's bench and his name is Jordan Hamilton. If we are so intent on moving Evans back to PG we should have a couple players who move well without the ball who can hit long distance shots. McLemore is one, and Hamilton is the other.

 

[Bricklayer]

Brick did. He said he'd make a nice "support player". Now go off on a tirade making stupid assumptions...it's early in the day.

And I stand by that.

If he doesn't develop a handle, you know kind of like that other SG we have has, he won't be more than support for the stars. But support player is an expansive term that includes a number of very good and very useful players. Joakim Noah is a support player. Tony Allen is a support player. If we take McClemore to be a guy who defends, shoots threes, finishes with authority, but just can't create his own shot, you're maybe talking about a very useful player well suited to playing a support role. And a guy who could average 15 and be an elite support player in the style of a more athletic Wes Matthews. A much more useful and natural fit for such a role than any of the MT/IT/Jimmer trio. I like support players. I consider them higher lifeforms than guys who like to chuck up shots off their own dribble, unless those chuckers are full fledged stars.

Now if he magically develops an NBA worthy handle, then you can start considering potential stardom.

Before you start yet another pointless argument, let me preemptively lay these two points out:
1) EVERYBODY says his handle is his weakness. Its universal. So don't bother throwing out some line about how dare I assume. I assume nothing more than the common chatter. If its wrong, great. If its right, and so long as we don't lose a guy with star talent to get a guy with support talent, could still be good. The Kings need more support players and less guys chucking 1 on 1.

2) star guards can almost universally create their own shots. Virtually the only exceptions to that rule are truly superior off the ball rabbits like Reggie Miller. Think about the All Star candidate guards in the West, just starting in Portland and working east: Lillard, Curry, Reke (yes), Kobe, Paul, Nash no longer but once, Lawson, Parker, Harden, Rubio, Westbrook...may have forgotten somebody in there. But you get the idea. They are ALL good with the ball. Its what puts you over the top as a guard, and let's you score even when nothing is there. So if McLemore is not, unless he is an energizer bunny like Miller complete with an entire team setting screen after screen to get him open, and reports are somewhat the opposite, then again, support player. Which is only an insult if you think he should be a star.

 

[Gary]

I gotcha. I made the mistake once of mixing up the KU/UK thing with Kentucky Wildcat fans once. Same reaction as if someone called our team the Sacramento Lakers.

LOL yah. Those damn Sacramento Lakers and Kobe O'neil.

 

[Bricklayer]

Wes Johnson? lol

Not all shooting ability is created equal. There are varying degrees of creativity as a shooter. Wes Johnson could barely hit a spot up jumper being set up by Ricky Rubio.

In his final year of college ball Wesley Johnson averaged:
35.0min 18.9pts (.502 .415 .772) 9.8reb 2.5ast 1.9stl 2.1blk 2.6TO

In his final year of college ball Ben McLemore averaged:
32.2min 15.9pts (.495 .420 .870) 5.2reb 2.0ast 1.0stl 0.7blk 2.1TO

So yes, I had major doubts about a one hit wonder 5th year senior when Johnson came out and did not want him, but before seeing his NBA work the supposed gap between he and McLemore in shooting ability would not have been so obvious. The college FG% and 3pt% are almost identical. Although maybe the FT% might have tipped a bit who was the better shooter.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

And I stand by that.

If he doesn't develop a handle, you know kind of like that other SG we have has, he won't be more than support for the stars. But support player is an expansive term that includes a number of very good and very useful players. Joakim Noah is a support player. Tony Allen is a support player. If we take McClemore to be a guy who defends, shoots threes, finishes with authority, but just can't create his own shot, you're maybe talking about a very useful player well suited to playing a support role. And a guy who could average 15 and be an elite support player in the style of a more athletic Wes Matthews. A much more useful and natural fit for such a role than any of the MT/IT/Jimmer trio. I like support players. I consider them higher lifeforms than guys who like to chuck up shots off their own dribble, unless those chuckers are full fledged stars.

Now if he magically develops an NBA worthy handle, then you can start considering potential stardom.

Before you start yet another pointless argument, let me preemptively lay these two points out:
1) EVERYBODY says his handle is his weakness. Its universal. So don't bother throwing out some line about how dare I assume. I assume nothing more than the common chatter. If its wrong, great. If its right, and so long as we don't lose a guy with star talent to get a guy with support talent, could still be good. The Kings need more support players and less guys chucking 1 on 1.

2) star guards can almost universally create their own shots. Virtually the only exceptions to that rule are truly superior off the ball rabbits like Reggie Miller. Think about the All Star candidate guards in the West, just starting in Portland and working east: Lillard, Curry, Reke (yes), Kobe, Paul, Nash no longer but once, Lawson, Parker, Harden, Rubio, Westbrook...may have forgotten somebody in there. But you get the idea. They are ALL good with the ball. Its what puts you over the top as a guard, and let's you score even when nothing is there. So if McLemore is not, unless he is an energizer bunny like Miller complete with an entire team setting screen after screen to get him open, and reports are somewhat the opposite, then again, support player. Which is only an insult if you think he should be a star.

Totally agree and I have no issue with it.

To take it a couple steps further, I like that part about him. If he was an alpha dog he'd be a chucker. How many teams have won the title with their best player being shooting guard (who is actually a good shooter, not Dwayne Wade / penetrator) ... not many. Aside from Kobe Bryant of course, but he's been the best player in the NBA for the last 10-15 years.

McLemore scored almost 16PPG on one of the best college basketball teams last season while only taking 10 shots per game. I love that. I love that more than anything about him. Super athlete, incredible potential as a defender, great shooter, great off the ball, good rebounder for a 2, and no ego. Especially on this team that has a massive personality in DMC, guys who are mild mannered (Tyreke and McLemore) who are also super efficient offensively are exactly what we need next to a big personality, alpha dog center who isn't as efficient as we'd like him to be. Think about that for a minute. We already have one of the most efficient basket attackers in the league in Evans, and now we have a potential killer efficient shooter. Both guys who have no issue letting Cousins be the man. And they are guys who should be able to defend their spot, which also helps Cousins until we get him a defending 4.

Where this whole plan goes to hell is if we lose Evans. Despite many posters here and elsewhere trying to say differently, you can't convince me that losing Evans isn't where we are headed right now. Things can change, but I can only read so many negative reports without one positive report before it becomes ignorant to believe he is likely staying. Not saying it's impossible, but it is the road we are on.

The other issue is that for years now many of us have been saying that the ideal match next to Evans is a guy who can handle the ball and create to take the pressure of Evans while also spreading the floor and playing defense. Doug Christie, right? This new situation isn't that. McLemore isn't that guy. It's not a sure thing, but man, even if it wasn't my previous ideal scenario, we need to roll with it because losing Evans for nothing is far worse than not having a SG that can handle the ball with him.

This is the new direction we need to go in. Or Evans at the 3, but I find it unlikely his agent will want him here if that is the plan.

 

[roasthawg]

In retrospect this pick is making more and more sense to me... if you just look at it in terms of McLemore vs Thornton you have McLemore giving you far more defense and who is on a different planet in terms of finishing ability and offensive rebounds while not sacrificing anything in terms of shooting the ball (which is pretty much all Thornton excels at). So we got a major upgrade over a guy who's averaged almost 30mpg for us the past two seasons... that's pretty good at #7 in a weak draft.

I'm a big fan of Tyreke at the point and while I'm a little nervous about ball handling becoming an issue with Reke/McLemore backcourt I think we got good value at #7 and one of the few players in this draft with all-star potential.

 

[Kingster]

And I stand by that.

If he doesn't develop a handle, you know kind of like that other SG we have has, he won't be more than support for the stars. But support player is an expansive term that includes a number of very good and very useful players. Joakim Noah is a support player. Tony Allen is a support player. If we take McClemore to be a guy who defends, shoots threes, finishes with authority, but just can't create his own shot, you're maybe talking about a very useful player well suited to playing a support role. And a guy who could average 15 and be an elite support player in the style of a more athletic Wes Matthews. A much more useful and natural fit for such a role than any of the MT/IT/Jimmer trio. I like support players. I consider them higher lifeforms than guys who like to chuck up shots off their own dribble, unless those chuckers are full fledged stars.

Now if he magically develops an NBA worthy handle, then you can start considering potential stardom.

Before you start yet another pointless argument, let me preemptively lay these two points out:
1) EVERYBODY says his handle is his weakness. Its universal. So don't bother throwing out some line about how dare I assume. I assume nothing more than the common chatter. If its wrong, great. If its right, and so long as we don't lose a guy with star talent to get a guy with support talent, could still be good. The Kings need more support players and less guys chucking 1 on 1.

2) star guards can almost universally create their own shots. Virtually the only exceptions to that rule are truly superior off the ball rabbits like Reggie Miller. Think about the All Star candidate guards in the West, just starting in Portland and working east: Lillard, Curry, Reke (yes), Kobe, Paul, Nash no longer but once, Lawson, Parker, Harden, Rubio, Westbrook...may have forgotten somebody in there. But you get the idea. They are ALL good with the ball. Its what puts you over the top as a guard, and let's you score even when nothing is there. So if McLemore is not, unless he is an energizer bunny like Miller complete with an entire team setting screen after screen to get him open, and reports are somewhat the opposite, then again, support player. Which is only an insult if you think he should be a star.

At least you're a stand up guy and own up to it. Now Dime Dropper: What was that again about nobody calling McLemore a support player? Or maybe Padrino can chime in with some non sequiter nonsense.

I agree, by the way, that there's no guarantee that McLemore is a future star. That's just common sense, and my discussion of his risks in previous posts should have given any reader the idea that I don't see stardom as a foregone conclusion for McLemore. I just don't want to dismiss him at the beginning of his career as a support player. I guess some guys just don't get that distinction.

 

[Dime Dropper]

At least you're a stand up guy and own up to it. Now Dime Dropper: What was that again about nobody calling McLemore a support player? Or maybe Padrino can chime in with some non sequiter nonsense.

I agree, by the way, that there's no guarantee that McLemore is a future star. That's just common sense, and my discussion of his risks in previous posts should have given any reader the idea that I don't see stardom as a foregone conclusion for McLemore. I just don't want to dismiss him at the beginning of his career as a support player. I guess some guys just don't get that distinction.

You're a funny little chap, aren't you? Your reading skills are as poor as your BB IQ. Lets have a little revision, shall we?

You said:

It's insulting to talk about this kid being a "support player." Laughable actually.

To which I replied:

No one is saying he can't be more than that.

And I was right. Lets take a look at what Brick initially said, which you replied to with your nonsense:

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.

Nowhere does he say he won't be a star. He's, in fact, saying that even if he doesn't, he'll be a good support player.

So, now that I've arranged it nicely so that you might be able to understand what happened, would you like to point out to me where I said nobody said he'll be a support player? It's there in front of you. I said nobody insisted he won't be more than that, which is what your first post stated. You're very hard work. You go in all guns blazing and can't even read what other people are saying. And you ignored pretty much all the points made by myself and Padrino, so well done for that. Hardly a surprise.

 

[Padrino]

At least you're a stand up guy and own up to it. Now Dime Dropper: What was that again about nobody calling McLemore a support player? Or maybe Padrino can chime in with some non sequiter nonsense.

I agree, by the way, that there's no guarantee that McLemore is a future star. That's just common sense, and my discussion of his risks in previous posts should have given any reader the idea that I don't see stardom as a foregone conclusion for McLemore. I just don't want to dismiss him at the beginning of his career as a support player. I guess some guys just don't get that distinction.

respond to the meat of my previous post, then we'll talk.

 

[beb0p]

I know I have been promoting this guy but there is another out there who is pretty good at moving without the basketball who plays SF. He's hidden on Denver's bench and his name is Jordan Hamilton. If we are so intent on moving Evans back to PG we should have a couple players who move well without the ball who can hit long distance shots. McLemore is one, and Hamilton is the other.

I love Hamilton's offense but the problem is that he doesn't defend. I don't mean he can't defend, maybe he can but he doesn't even try. He could be so good if only he put in some effort on the other end.

 

[VF21]

From Twitter:

Kansas Jayhawks ‏@KUAthletics 53m

Dear @SacramentoKings fans, here's what you can expect from @BenMcLemore http://youtu.be/dAEmLF3xzC4 . Hope you enjoy as much as we did. #kubball

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

In his final year of college ball Wesley Johnson averaged:
35.0min 18.9pts (.502 .415 .772) 9.8reb 2.5ast 1.9stl 2.1blk 2.6TO

In his final year of college ball Ben McLemore averaged:
32.2min 15.9pts (.495 .420 .870) 5.2reb 2.0ast 1.0stl 0.7blk 2.1TO

So yes, I had major doubts about a one hit wonder 5th year senior when Johnson came out and did not want him, but before seeing his NBA work the supposed gap between he and McLemore in shooting ability would not have been so obvious. The college FG% and 3pt% are almost identical. Although maybe the FT% might have tipped a bit who was the better shooter.

If you had watched either of these guys in college it would have been obvious who is the better shooter. Wes Johnson spotted up. McLemore moves off the ball, comes off of screens, and catches lobs. One is a roleplayer talent. The other is a 3rd option on a championship team type. We have #1 and #2 options covered. McLemore's skill type is the ideal #3 option.

not really. there are stars. and there are support players. there may be the slightest shade of gray between them on a very rare occasion, but that's hardly germane when discussing an unproven player. see, there's tim duncan and tony parker (stars), then there's danny green and kawhi leonard (support players). there's lebron james and dwayne wade (stars), then there's shane battier and ray allen (support players). there's steph curry (star) and david lee (borderline star--here's where that slight gray area occasionally comes into play), and there's andrew bogut and klay thompson (support players). now, you can be a high-level support player, and i fully expect mclemore to become at least that, but the nba is at all times a hierarchy. your stars are at the top, and just about everyone beneath them plays a supporting role. it's not terribly complicated, as there's only one ball to go around...

What about Bosh? He made the All-Star team but was hardly on Wade and James' level in terms of importance. I can think of countless examples of great 3rd options who should be distinguished from simple role players. Rip Hamilton is one. Ray Allen was on the Celtics. Peja on the glory day Kings. Alan Houston. Kevin Martin on the Thunder. These guys aren't simple "3 and D" spotup roleplayers. They play a more significant role in an offense. McLemore is that kind of talent, if you're taking Cousins and Reke as #1 and #2 options.

 

[Gary]

I love Hamilton's offense but the problem is that he doesn't defend. I don't mean he can't defend, maybe he can but he doesn't even try. He could be so good if only he put in some effort on the other end.

Definitely. His D was a little suspect, but I feel with all those pieces that Denver for Carmello, Hamilton got lost in the shuffle. His per36 offensive stats are pretty dang good.

 

[Gary]

If you had watched either of these guys in college it would have been obvious who is the better shooter. Wes Johnson spotted up. McLemore moves off the ball, comes off of screens, and catches lobs. One is a roleplayer talent. The other is a 3rd option on a championship team type. We have #1 and #2 options covered. McLemore's skill type is the ideal #3 option.



What about Bosh? He made the All-Star team but was hardly on Wade and James' level in terms of importance. I can think of countless examples of great 3rd options who should be distinguished from simple role players. Rip Hamilton is one. Ray Allen was on the Celtics. Peja on the glory day Kings. Alan Houston. Kevin Martin on the Thunder. These guys aren't simple "3 and D" spotup roleplayers. They play a more significant role in an offense. McLemore is that kind of talent, if you're taking Cousins and Reke as #1 and #2 options.

Vlade made the allstar team being a 3rd option behind Webber and Peja.

 

[roasthawg]

Vlade made the allstar team being a 3rd option behind Webber and Peja.

Harden on the Thunder was an epic third option.

 

[rainmaker]

Absolutely pathological. Do you comprehend that relegating McLemore as a "support player" is not ipso facto saying that McLemore is a star player? Unbelievable.

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.

Your ability to understand the traits of a role player vs star is again left wanting. No one is saying MLM can't become a star, actually most are pointing out he has star talent and the most upside in the draft.

Yet, what are his strengths? Shooting, movement without the ball and athleticism. Decent defender too with upside on that side of the ball. What are his weaknesses? Can't create well off the bounce for himself or others and mentally isn't aggressive enough. Actually, his lack of aggression is something which keeps popping up. Of course he hasn't played a minute in the NBA yet and a lot of this can change, but going off where he is right now he practically is the definition of a support player, a very good one.

Why? A star can create for himself or others. A role player needs to play off the attention of others and the creation of others. And until you get to Ray Allen/Reggie Miller territory, which MLM can but is nowhere near doing at this point in time, he's a support player who will rely on others creating opportunities for him. Shooters who can't create, no matter how great they are at shooting have a long history of being support players. Peja, was a support player, yet an extremely high level support player. Peja still developed his jab step/step back, or quick crossover off a jab step which he could use in isolation, and it was a vital part of his game. Can MLM do the same? Of course he could, hopefully, but he hasn't yet. Nothing wrong with that. Those players are very important. But a star is generally someone you can throw the ball to and have them create something for themselves or others no matter the defense, no matter the situation. That does not coincide with MLM's game right now.

 

[Padrino]

What about Bosh? He made the All-Star team but was hardly on Wade and James' level in terms of importance. I can think of countless examples of great 3rd options who should be distinguished from simple role players. Rip Hamilton is one. Ray Allen was on the Celtics. Peja on the glory day Kings. Alan Houston. Kevin Martin on the Thunder. These guys aren't simple "3 and D" spotup roleplayers. They play a more significant role in an offense. McLemore is that kind of talent, if you're taking Cousins and Reke as #1 and #2 options.

again, in the very post you quoted, i allowed for "the slightest shade of gray between" star players and support players. but it is rare, and it is dependent entirely upon context. chris bosh was a star on his island in toronto. in miami, he's clearly a support player. kawhi leonard is clearly a support player in san antonio, but when duncan and ginobili retire, there will be considerable room for leonard to grow into a star (if he's capable, of course)...

i'm not really talking about working definitions as much as i am talking about active roles. and, given mclemore's skillset as we know it, and unproven as it remains, i'd call him a support player. but he's very talented, and i expect him to be a very high-level support player, as rip hamilton was in his prime. but peja stojakovic he is not. as a SF, peja was 6'10", 220lbs, as big as a lot of nba PF's. those kinds of physical gifts set him apart, and thrust him into that rare gray area between stars and support players...

as for kevin martin, he's clearly a support player for OKC, having occupied their sixth man role. ray allen was clearly a support player to garnett and pierce in boston. allan houston was, in my opinion, a support player masquerading as a star, though he had considerable talent as an outside shooter. regardless, i feel as though i've made it clear that i do not believe ben mclemore will be a hum-drum roleplayer for the kings. i believe he will be a high-level support player who provides the kind of spacing that klay thompson provides in golden state. there's a difference, after all, in the level of talent between thompson and steph curry. steph's got a wicked handle and he has great instincts as a passer...

if mclemore works on his handle, if he can develop a dribble-drive of any kind, then we'll talk about whether or not he can be a fully-fledged star. but i can't think of many elite SG's in the contemporary nba who didn't come into the league with those skills already. your top guys, your wades and westbrooks, and yes, even a guy like tyreke evans, had an established handle and strong rim attack upon entering the league. it doesn't mean mclemore won't become something special, it just means that, right now, i see him as a supporting talent...

 

[Hallama]

How about Allan Houston? He wasn't a ball handler. I think McClemore will show a little more of his ball handling skills in the NBA, not quite as good as say Ray Allan, but gotta' love even mentioning Ben McC in the same breathe.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

again, in the very post you quoted, i allowed for "the slightest shade of gray between" star players and support players. but it is rare, and it is dependent entirely upon context. chris bosh was a star on his island in toronto. in miami, he's clearly a support player. kawhi leonard is clearly a support player in san antonio, but when duncan and ginobili retire, there will be considerable room for leonard to grow into a star (if he's capable, of course)...

i'm not really talking about working definitions as much as i am talking about active roles. and, given mclemore's skillset as we know it, and unproven as it remains, i'd call him a support player. but he's very talented, and i expect him to be a very high-level support player, as rip hamilton was in his prime. but peja stojakovic he is not. as a SF, peja was 6'10", 220lbs, as big as a lot of nba PF's. those kinds of physical gifts set him apart, and thrust him into that rare gray area between stars and support players...

as for kevin martin, he's clearly a support player for OKC, having occupied their sixth man role. ray allen was clearly a support player to garnett and pierce in boston. allan houston was, in my opinion, a support player masquerading as a star, though he had considerable talent as an outside shooter. regardless, i feel as though i've made it clear that i do not believe ben mclemore will be a hum-drum roleplayer for the kings. i believe he will be a high-level support player who provides the kind of spacing that klay thompson provides in golden state. there's a difference, after all, in the level of talent between thompson and steph curry. steph's got a wicked handle and he has great instincts as a passer...

if mclemore works on his handle, if he can develop a dribble-drive of any kind, then we'll talk about whether or not he can be a fully-fledged star. but i can't think of many elite SG's in the contemporary nba who didn't come into the league with those skills already. your top guys, your wades and westbrooks, and yes, even a guy like tyreke evans, had an established handle and strong rim attack upon entering the league. it doesn't mean mclemore won't become something special, it just means that, right now, i see him as a supporting talent...

At this point we're just debating semantics about what is considered a "star". But we're in clear agreement that McLemore has the talent to be more than just a Bowen, Danny Green "3 and D" guy. I personally believe that class of player is common and distinct enough to deserve its own category (as opposed to just a "star" and "support player" dichotomy), but c'est la vie

 

[macadocious]

How about Allan Houston? He wasn't a ball handler. I think McClemore will show a little more of his ball handling skills in the NBA, not quite as good as say Ray Allan, but gotta' love even mentioning Ben McC in the same breathe.

We don't have a $100 million to give to McCelmore.

 

[Mad D]

I can think of countless examples of great 3rd options who should be distinguished from simple role players. Rip Hamilton is one. Ray Allen was on the Celtics. Peja on the glory day Kings. Alan Houston. Kevin Martin on the Thunder. These guys aren't simple "3 and D" spotup roleplayers. They play a more significant role in an offense. McLemore is that kind of talent, if you're taking Cousins and Reke as #1 and #2 options.

Michael Finley

 

[Uncia03]

I know I have been promoting this guy but there is another out there who is pretty good at moving without the basketball who plays SF. He's hidden on Denver's bench and his name is Jordan Hamilton. If we are so intent on moving Evans back to PG we should have a couple players who move well without the ball who can hit long distance shots. McLemore is one, and Hamilton is the other.

You've mentioned Hamilton a couple of times.

I really like him. I liked him out of Texas and was surprised that he dropped so far down the draft.

He rebounds really well at the SF position due to his good size...and as you say...he moves really well with-out the ball and has a great little drive and pull-up from the baseline.
Probably all of the sitting on the bench has been humbling...and I figure that he'd be able to buy into a team concept and play well.

I would have no problems if we ran a Tyreke/McLemore/Hamilton line-up. Not sure about Hamilton's defense...though it should be decent enough.

Since we have DA coming from Denver...and Denver has a glut of SFs...you'd figure that the Kings would be looking at them...and try to bring in the guy who makes the most sense. I love Iggy's defense and play-making...but Hamilton definitely brings the shooting you'd want to help space the floor for Tyreke and Cousins.

 

[Gilles]

McLemore is versatile scorer(excellent inside and from 3 in transition, prolific spot up, off the screens, str8 penetration off of fake), and given, how ROY is awarded, level of confidence in him from FO, which means the path will be cleared out of any roster obstacles for him, BML has a very good chance at being ROY. Still he doesn't have now, nor for a foreseeable future ability to shift defenses - he's going to demand a defender, who will stick to him, but if Ben wants to score he will have to shake his guy via movement and screens. A few times in college he got shot down because of this - he found guys he couldn't shake. He will now see NBA level athletes every game...

 

[jcwkings]

Kevin Durant and Ray Allen aren't great ball handlers, John Salmons is a very good ball handler, only 2 of those are going to be Hall of Famers. And btw you can improve your ball handling, Kevin Durant was absolutely uncomfortable doing anything off the dribble as a rookie, now he brings the ball if Westbrook isn't in the game. People on here are just way overrating Tyreke as if he is the next Dwayne Wade or Lebron James. I like Tyreke and hope he stays, but lets state the facts, four years into his career he still is TERRIBLE shooting off the dribble, which is an absolute must for any ball dominant guard, his basketball IQ isn't Elite, its average at best, he doesn't show that drive/fire/assertiveness that you see from other elite players(Kobe, Paul, Lebron, Wade, Durant etc.). He isn't an elite athlete and gets blocked at the rim more than he should, and gets tentative going inside if the other team has an good shotblocker, aside from Chris Paul, every other top star in the league has ELITE athetic ability(CP3 makes it up with immense b ball IQ, toughnees, heart, will to win).

So my question to the Tyreke is a superstar bandwaggon is, what are you guys seeing that I don't?

What i do see in Tyreke is potentially elite defensive wing stopper, that is deadly in the open floor, while he doesn't have elite athletic ability, he does have long strides to go along with a very strong frame at the guard position, which puts him at Andre Igoudala level if he reaches his potential, and a little more if he ever learns to shoot off the dribble to the point where defenses don't just concede that midrange shot to him.