2014 Draft Prospects:

Hmmm, 1. Embiid, 2. Wiggins, 3. Parker, 4. Exum, 5. Vonleh, 6. Gordon, 7. Smart, 8. Randle, Stauskas, Payton, McDermott.
I already mentioned earlier that I thought it was possible that Randle might slide to us, and frankly, that's who I would take. I'd take any of those that slide except Smart. Other than the so called foot issue, I'm not sure why Randle would slide. He may never be a prolific shotblocker, but I think he can be a good defender. He's an excellent athlete, and although he didn't show it much in college, he has a nice jumpshot all the way out to three point range.
I agree with you on Smart, but I don't want Gordon either. I just don't see him more than a good energy guy off the bench, though I'll concede that his highest ceiling if he got his shooting act together would be a Shane Battier type, which ain't bad. I'm just not willing to take that bet with #8. If a guy can't hit 50% on his free throws, no way can I pick him #8 unless he's a major shot blocking defensive force. The one thing that gives Gordon some mojo in my view is that he has high BBIQ, and I'm more willing to bet a high BBIQ guy can eventually learn to shoot than a low BBIQ guy. All that said, I'm guessing the Ainge rumor on Gordon is smoke. It wouldn't be surprising to me if both Gordon and Smart are still on the board at #8.

I also agree on Randle; he could fall to the Kings. But for fun and giggles, I'm not going to be shocked if in no particular order Embiid, Wiggins, Parker, Exum Vonleh, Randle and Saric are taken before the Kings, which would leave the Kings with Gordon, Smart, McDermott, Stauskas, Peyton, et al, which hopefully would mean the Kings swing a very nice trade for a team that salivates over one of those guys.
 
Last edited:

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
Anyone still on the Isaiah Austin train can now officially get off of it.

He's been diagnosed with Marfan syndrome so that's it. Game over. Talk about being dealt a bad hand in life.

Best of luck to him with the rest of his life.
 
Yeah I feel for him, devastating news to hear you can't play in the NBA despite having the capability to do it, having worked all your life for it. Hope everything works out for him.
 
Yeah I feel for him, devastating news to hear you can't play in the NBA despite having the capability to do it, having worked all your life for it. Hope everything works out for him.
Yeah, very sad. I wondered why he had fallen so far down the draft boards. I thought perhaps because of his eye, but as it turns out, far more serious than that. Damm shame. He wasn't on my hit list to draft, but I thought that if he doesn't get drafted, sign him up for summer league and invite him to camp. He was talented.
 
Noticed a recent listing of the top 100 players in the draft on nbadraft.net. Interesting, they were:

8. Randle
9. Hood
10. Payton
11. Harris
12. McDermott
13. Stauskas

My reaction today is as follows:
Don't want Randle, like Hood but SF is not my first priority, Payton looks good if we want a PG, I like Harris though a little short for a SG but above average at everything else important, like McDermott but do we pick a SF?, Stauskas is another SG I like and he is two inches taller than Harris though not as well rounded.

If we decide to pick at 8 we could do ourselves some good with a choice from these. Have a good day PDA.
 
With Gay opting in, and if they retain IT, SG and PF become the main targets if you're drafting for need (which I personally don't like). But wouldn't Adrien Payne be a perfect fit?

Still don't understand why he is projected in the 10-20 range.

I still want Gordon or Smart in the Kings range. You get a discount on their overall talents because of their questionable shooting.
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
With Gay opting in, and if they retain IT, SG and PF become the main targets if you're drafting for need (which I personally don't like). But wouldn't Adrien Payne be a perfect fit?

Still don't understand why he is projected in the 10-20 range.

I still want Gordon or Smart in the Kings range. You get a discount on their overall talents because of their questionable shooting.
Three years older than most of his competition. Not great on the defensive end. His university hasn't exactly had a great track record with players entering the NBA (Unless Draymon Green counts as a success). He got a lot of his numbers by virtue of being a featured player on his team, something that won't happen on an NBA roster.

Choose a couple of those and you have the reasoning of any scout around the league.
 
I'm not suggesting we pick him 8th. And I don't think he gets past 15 (ie, if Kings trade with CHI).

But he's athletic, very good defensive rebounder, skilled around the basket and can stretch with his jumper. I think that's not a bad fit for the Kings.
 
I don't like Payne at all. He's not a good fit here either, which is what I keep seeing people post.
Payne certainly isn't my first, or second or 15th choice, but he's not a bad player. He's very athletic and he's a decent to good defender. He was asked to play away from the basket a lot this past season because of his ability to shoot the three. I see him as a good bench player.
 
Payne certainly isn't my first, or second or 15th choice, but he's not a bad player. He's very athletic and he's a decent to good defender. He was asked to play away from the basket a lot this past season because of his ability to shoot the three. I see him as a good bench player.
I see him as the same, which is why I'm not a fan for this team. Don't dislike him as it probably appeared from my post, but just don't see the appeal for us. He wouldn't help us at all, IMO of course.
 
One player I have not seen one person mention that I think can be a nice contributor for a team....T.J. Warren out of NC state.
I like Warren, but I don't see him as a good fit. I'm not sure what he is exactly. Terrific athlete, but he does almost all of his scoring at the basket, and that's the reason I don't see the fit. However, there's no doubt he can score. I'm curious to see how his game translates to the NBA.
 
I like this scout's take on Gordon from Grantland:



Scout 1: I think he’s Shawn Marion.

Here’s why I like Gordon, and it’s rare for me (my teams have always been about shooting; you need it to win). It’s simple: Gordon impacts the game without being a shooter. It’s hard to do that. He knows 100 percent what he is. Jabari Parker will take a million bad shots; Gordon already knows he can’t take them.

In the NBA he will guard 1 through 4. He rebounds, disrupts the glass. Not as great with defensive rebounds as he is on the offensive glass. He can dribble and pass. On defense, he gives you deflections. He dives on the floor, makes winning plays. He only cares about winning. He can switch everywhere on defense; there is a lot of value in that.

If you get him fifth or sixth, that’s really good. For me to be this complimentary to a kid that isn’t a shooter is rare. He just needs to develop as a representative shooter over time, to at least be a guy you have to put a defender on. I hear he can’t make 3s — who the **** cares? Sixteen-footer, 33 percent from 3, five years from now? That’s all you’ll need.
 
^^Gordon's a stud... been hoping for him but doesn't look like that's gonna happen. Hoping Smart falls or we can trade out although Randle would be very tempting even though he's not a good fit.
 
I don't think Smart makes it to #8. Don't see Celtics or Lakers passing on him if he makes it that far.

Randle and Vonleh are the two guys I see falling to #8. I still like Randle as a NBA player with star potential.
 
Ya I say don't trade the pick if Randle is there. He has talent and can play from the high post scouts say he attack from the perimeter in high school and showed a jump shot. David didn't take that many jump shots at Kentucky either. It's not like any of our PF have any business on our team in 2-4 years. If he isn't a fit with DMC make him the first big off the bench where he can be the go to scorer.
 
Randle also fits the Danny Ainge drafting players as an asset model too. Teams will always be interested in trading for a guy like him on a rookie contract in a year or two.
 
Well the day has finally arrived, and judging on what's happened so far, it appears that we're in for an exciting day. Hopefully its more bang than fizzle. I'm sticking with my four guys being one of the players we draft, if, we don't trade the pick, or if, someone totally unexpected moves down. My four guys being, Gordon, Payton, McDermott, and Stauskas. If all four are there, then I think the Kings will select Gordon. If he's gone, then I think their choice will be Payton or Stauskas. I have no problem with either of those choices. I know some would say move down and still grab either of those players. Well, Stauskas has been rumored to go as high as number 5 to Utah. Probably just a smoke screen, but you never know. Payton has been rumored to go as high as number 7 to the Lakers. Once again you just don't know, but if you really like one of those players, do you really want to gamble with a bird in hand?

I don't think the Kings have any interest in Smart, which means they'll probably draft him. I know I've spent a lot of time throwing rocks at Smart. To the extent that I'm sure some think I hate him. Not true! I just don't see him as the best fit for the Kings. First of all, he's not a pass first PG, something that some of you profess to want, and yet want Smart. He averaged more shots per game than anyone else on his team. Over 40% of those shots were three point shots, while shooting under 30% from the three. He had never played PG in his life until his freshman year at Oklahoma St. So in truth he's a project at that position. He takes a huge amount of either contested or off balance, or both, shots. Which leads me to question his decision making. He had the highest usage rate on his team. Lastly, they say he's a leader. Well, just where did he lead his team. They barely made the NCAA tournament, and one could argue that they didn't deserve to be there. In short, he didn't make his team a winner. I'm not laying it all on him, but he's the anointed leader, so a lot of that responsibility is at his doorstep.

So in short, I think he's more media hype than substance. But, if we end up drafting him, I'll hope and pray that I'm wrong, and I'll certainly support him. My question to those of you that like him, is why? I mean if you didn't think Tyreke was the right fit for the Kings, I just don't understand how you can think that Smart is. On the other hand, Payton is the exact opposite of Smart, and one could argue that he matches everything Smart does, and then some. He's taller, more athletic, just as good a defender, a much better ballhandler, and definitely a pass first PG, if that's what your looking for. The one thing they have in common is that neither is a good outside shooter. In fact, both are terrible and both shot under 30% from the three. So they both have the same flaw. The difference is, Payton knows it, and seldom takes three pointers, where Smart continues to just chuck away. Payton will remind you of Tyreke with his ability to weave his way through traffic to the basket. Where Smart is more of a straight line attacker. But both make most of their money attacking the basket.

Of course my personal favorite in the this draft, at least where we're picking, is Nik Stauskas. I've spoken about a player having the wow factor, which means a player does something during a game that made me sit up and say wow, that was impressive. Other than Parker, no other player gave me more wow moments than Stauskas. Now that in and of itself doesn't make anyone a star. I had few wow moments with Wiggins, and I doubt he's going to be a bust. I had a lot of wow moments with Jimmer at BYU. And by no means am I comparing Stauskas to Jimmer. The only thing they have in common is that both are white, and both are very good shooters. Stauskas is a way better ball handler, and is a better athlete. In general, Stauskas is a more rounded player than Jimmer. He has a ton of moves with which to create his own shot. You never know whether he's driving to the basket, or pulling up for a fade away, or dishing the ball to a cutter. He almost plays like a PG and is a terrific passer. Point is, despite the fact that we already have McLemore, he's a great fit for the team. Plus he's a deadly outside shooter either as a catch and shoot, or coming off a screen. He nas a lightning quick release. When you add in that because of his size, just under 6'7" he can also play some SF, and because of his skill set, he can play some PG on occasion, he can be more valuable overall. My personal opinion is that I think Stauskas has a chance to be a star. He needs to work on his defense, but I believe he has the tools to become a good at best, and decent at worse defender.

I like McDermott, and in some ways he's a similar player to Stauskas. I think Stauskas is a better athlete, but don't underrate McDermott's athleticism. I don't question his ability to score. He, like Stauskas had refined his offensive game to where you just don't know what he's going to do. He has the Dirk fade away. He can come off a screen, or he can spot up in the corner. He's amazingly effective in the post despite being a little undersized. He always seems to know what he's going to do before the ball hits his hands, and therefore seldom has any wasted motion or wasted dribbles. His BBIQ, like Stauskas, is off the charts. And again like Stauskas, he's a very good passer and a very unselfish player. Where the separation comes is with his ballhandling. He's not a bad ballhandler, but he's not great either. However, ballhandling isn't at a premium for his position like it is with Stauskas. The other difference is that I think Stauskas is more athletic than McDermott, and has better lateral quickness, and therefore has a better chance to become a good defender. But, no guarantee's on either. One thing they both have in common is that both are gym rats that constantly work on their games, and both are very smart basketball players. Either would help spread the floor and either would help in the assist dept. Both are the kind of player the Kings are looking for. Not without flaws, but just about every player in the draft has some sort of flaw.
 
Randle also fits the Danny Ainge drafting players as an asset model too. Teams will always be interested in trading for a guy like him on a rookie contract in a year or two.
I doubt Randle will be there, but if he is, you take him and go home. Not the perfect fit for the Kings, but you don't take a lesser player because of fit. That's how you build an almost contender. Makes for good beach parties where everyone gets along, but doesn't win many games.
 
Maybe a little late to the game, but if the Kings do acquire a 2nd rounder, this guy is really intriguing:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Khem-Birch-5793/

11.5 pts - 10.2 rebounds - 3.8 blocks

from the article: On the defensive end, Birch once again excelled as a shot blocker, ranking third among all prospects in ourtop-100, to the tune of 4.7 blocks per 40 minutes pace adjusted. He is capable of blocking shots both on and off the ball due to his combination of length, explosiveness and timing, and gradually gets inside of opposing players' heads as the game progresses.

He also improved his defensive rebounding prowess this year, and his rebounding in general was an area he seemed to put bigger emphasis on, which is important considering his offensive limitations.




From DraftExpress.comhttp://www.draftexpress.com#ixzz35lv7OZyp
http://www.draftexpress.com
 
I like McDermott, and in some ways he's a similar player to Stauskas. I think Stauskas is a better athlete, but don't underrate McDermott's athleticism. I don't question his ability to score. He, like Stauskas had refined his offensive game to where you just don't know what he's going to do. He has the Dirk fade away. He can come off a screen, or he can spot up in the corner. He's amazingly effective in the post despite being a little undersized. He always seems to know what he's going to do before the ball hits his hands, and therefore seldom has any wasted motion or wasted dribbles. His BBIQ, like Stauskas, is off the charts. And again like Stauskas, he's a very good passer and a very unselfish player. Where the separation comes is with his ballhandling. He's not a bad ballhandler, but he's not great either. However, ballhandling isn't at a premium for his position like it is with Stauskas. The other difference is that I think Stauskas is more athletic than McDermott, and has better lateral quickness, and therefore has a better chance to become a good defender. But, no guarantee's on either. One thing they both have in common is that both are gym rats that constantly work on their games, and both are very smart basketball players. Either would help spread the floor and either would help in the assist dept. Both are the kind of player the Kings are looking for. Not without flaws, but just about every player in the draft has some sort of flaw.
I think that another big difference is that Stauskas has very good size for his position (SG) whereas McDermott is either slightly undersized as a SF or VERY undersized as a PF. I don't think he can guard his position whereas in time I think Stauskas will be an average defender or perhaps more.

I think Stauskas has the tools to help a young, struggling team because he can do more. I think McDermott would only really excel on a team that already has talent and just needs him to be a third scoring option. He'd be fantastic for the Clippers.
 
I think that another big difference is that Stauskas has very good size for his position (SG) whereas McDermott is either slightly undersized as a SF or VERY undersized as a PF. I don't think he can guard his position whereas in time I think Stauskas will be an average defender or perhaps more.

I think Stauskas has the tools to help a young, struggling team because he can do more. I think McDermott would only really excel on a team that already has talent and just needs him to be a third scoring option. He'd be fantastic for the Clippers.
Agreed on Stauskas v Doug. I'd take Stauskas because he has a defined position and has real half court abilities/assets. With Doug, you have to make a lot of adjustments on offense and defense to play him to his strengths.

Doug may also get the Jimmer treatment where a team just puts a tall, lanky defensive minded player that crowds him from the minute he steps on the floor.
 
Maybe a little late to the game, but if the Kings do acquire a 2nd rounder, this guy is really intriguing:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Khem-Birch-5793/

11.5 pts - 10.2 rebounds - 3.8 blocks
I wouldn't mind taking a flyer on Birch in the 2nd round. Then again there are a number of guys I like in the second if the Kings deal for a pick. If they are sure IT is moving on Deonte Burton is a guy I like as a change of pace guard. And I also like Dinwiddie and especially KJ McDaniels who is probably gone in the 20's now but would be a steal in the 2nd as a future 3&D role player on the wing.

Glenn Robinson III and Patric Young could be nice role-players to nab in the 2nd round as well.
 
Agreed on Stauskas v Doug. I'd take Stauskas because he has a defined position and has real half court abilities/assets. With Doug, you have to make a lot of adjustments on offense and defense to play him to his strengths.

Doug may also get the Jimmer treatment where a team just puts a tall, lanky defensive minded player that crowds him from the minute he steps on the floor.
McDermott's advantages over Jimmer in that scenario are that (1) he's better at moving/attacking without the ball (2) he's a better ball handler for his position and (3) he's got a really nice post game. In fact McDermott began his college career as a strictly post player. I see him having a very Wally Szczerbiak like career. Hopefully without the injury issues.

But Stauskas can impact the game in more ways. Passing, ball handling, better outside shooter (McBuckets is a better scorer overall I think) and less of a defensive liability. I like Stauskas. Wouldn't be thrilled if the Kings took him because I don't think he's a game changer but I like him. I'd be upset if the Kings drafted McDermott.