2015 Draft Prospects:

MassachusettsKingsFan · May 19, 2015

I'll go all the way back to Jimmer.

Jimmer, Robinson, McLemore, and Stauskas all had major flaws on both ends of the court. Jimmer was stuck between positions, undersized, lacked athleticism, and couldn't defend. Robinson was undersized, had limited offensive skill, and was very immature / young. Played way too fast, never knew what he wanted to do with the ball, and often tried to do too much. McLemore was the steadiest prospect, but he had massive question marks on both ends of the court. He was and still is a very unaware defender. His offensive game was and is extremely limited. He had a defined position, but he couldn't handle the ball at all which is really unacceptable for a shooting guard in the NBA today. Stauskas was another sort of 'stuck between position' guy. Better with the ball in his hands, can't really defend either 1 or 2, looked overmatched the second he walked on the court.

I think drafting WCS would be the complete opposite type of selection. Defined position. Perfect size. Perfect athleticism. And most importantly, he has a side of the floor where he contributed at an elite level. All of those other prospects had major issues on both ends. Major. Cauley-Stein has issues in an area the Kings do not need him to contribute in. He's a three year college player from the most NBA ready college in the nation. This isn't Jimmer at BYU stuff. This is WCS going against top competition in more national TV games than the Kings had last year. I haven't been this sure about a 'second tier' prospect since Stephen Curry (in terms of guys people questioned prior to the draft, of course Anthony Davis and Blake Griffin types were sure things).

Not since Curry have I watched second tier NBA prospect and been so sure of their skills translating. I didn't think Curry would be as good as he is right now, but I knew that guy was going to do what he did in college in the NBA. I know Cauley-Stein is going to do what he did in college in the NBA, and that is enough for me.

I'd probably take Cauley-Stein second overall after Towns, but I'm crazy, and potentially bias. I've been on this WCS train for three years now, full steam ahead!

KingsCitizen · May 19, 2015

Now that the draft order is settled, I'll settle in the "Trill" wagon for good.
Might be a reach for some. But this is the guy that we need right now.

Gilles · May 19, 2015

There's always hope, that Chad Ford and friends keep hype train going, and Kings can extract something from Denver, Detroit or Charlotte, while still getting Willie: at this point Winslow, Johnson and two euros fit better for all than WCS does.

KingsCitizen · May 19, 2015

The tricky part here though is if we are willing to be smarty pants in during the draft and trade down to get some extra guys along the way.

For example, I think Hezonja would intrigue teams like Detroit and Charlotte. But most likely he'll be taken by Denver if he's on board.
However if Winslow is still on board, Denver could really use him as well.

So if we play it right, we can draft Hezonja, Denver drafts Winslow (assuming Porz is taken in top 5). Then we trade Hezonja with Landry/McCallum to Detroit for WCS pick and Jennings (see Hawks 2 PG style play on how we can use a Jennings-Collison tandem).

Or we can talk with Charlotte, I assume Detroit will not take WCS because they already have Drummond. And trade them Hezonja with Landry for Stephenson and WCS pick.

Gilles · May 19, 2015

Charlotte will do a lot to have one of Hezonja/Winslow to put next to MKG.
P.S. Kings would be stupid to take on Jennings or Stephenson. Dumping of Landry for cap space should be the target.

Gilles · May 21, 2015

Karl Kardashian

http://www.kentucky.com/2015/03/29/3774139_towns-grows-from-prima-donna-into.html?rh=1

bajaden · May 21, 2015

MassachusettsKingsFan said:

Just curious, how was Stauskas, who played SG at Michigan at 6'6", and was viewed by just about every scout as a SG, a player between positions. I know I mentioned a few times that he could play some SF in the right situation, and that he might be able to do the same at PG, but his true position was SG. You say he's better with the ball in his hands. Well tell me, just who is better without the ball in their hands? No matter who you are, if you never touch the ball, your not going to accomplish much on the court. And in fact, that was Nik's problem this past season. He hardly touched the ball. Not a shocker! He's a rookie, and most rookies, unless their part of a set play, don't touch the ball much.

I'm sorry, he didn't look over matched the minute he walked on the court. He did suffer some confidence problems along the way, but that's par for the course for a rookie. The last thirty games of the season he played much better, shooting over 40% from the three when Karl decided to make him part of the offense. So what exactly is his major flaw? He needs to add strength, and experience. On that I agree, but there's nothing major. I don't disagree about Robinson, Fredette, or McLemore. Each of them was limited in some way. but despite that, each of them at least got a shot at some playing time, regardless of the results. I despise lumping a bunch of players together and saying they all suffer from the same affliction.

The_Jamal · May 22, 2015

A trade I'm really looking at is Nik or Ben for Char at #9. Both guys fit the profile of exactly what they're looking for from the SG position, and they get NBA seasoning with both guys rather than having to deal with a rookie.

If we could walk out of this draft with Stan Johnson and WCS.... Damn. Talk about a serious boost to our defense and long-term potential as a team.

206Fan · May 22, 2015

OT about Nik, Rudy actually said it was hard to get into Nik earlier in the season.(what college kid wouldn't be hubris after a great run leading his team). Very interesting considering he was really quiet on the floor in the NBA.

I can't help but think Malone and Corbin silenced him out too much on the court. Way too many possessions where he didn't even get to touch the ball. As a rookie, you don't go and protest for more PT and Nik embraced his role standing in the corners... Karl came in and involved him much more. He looked good.

I'm really excited to see what Karl does with Nik this offseason. He's the type of player Karl has been looking for. Savvy player with high bball IQ.

Edit: Rudy's exact words

bajaden · May 22, 2015

206Fan said:

Yeah, it's hard for a rookie who is trying to fit in with players like Cousins, Gay, and other veterans, to go and demsnd the ball. You basically do what your told. Most head coaches, who may be trying to please the front office and trying to give playing time to your first round pick, will usually try to pick spots where he can do the least damage, and have him do something creative (sarcasm) like stand in the corner and wait for the ball. It was particularly frustrating for me because I watched him play for two years at Michigan, and knew he was capable of more. I thought that Nik was far more polished coming out of Michigan than Ben was coming out of Kansas.

bajaden · May 22, 2015

I listened to a podcast with Ryan Blake, one of the top NBA scouts. In the course of the conversation, he said that he thought Hezonja might slide down the draft board because he's currently under contract in europe, and that he has a huge buyout. He thinks that some team that's willing to let him stay in europe for two more years will draft him. He said that getting Porzingis to come over has similar problems, but not as bad. But stated that he would want all the eyes dotted and the tee's crossed before he drafted him.

In regards to Cauley-Stein, he said that everyone should bear in mind that players at Kentucky only play one half of their game. He said that Towns is a very good outside shooter, and killed it from the three in highschool, but hardly if ever took any long distance shots at Kentucky. He said that with Cauley-Stein, he was told to play defense, and that was it. They never ran any plays for him, but when dealing with Kentucky players, just because you don't see them display something, doesn't mean they can't do it.

Gilles · May 22, 2015

http://www.libertyballers.com/2015/4/21/8449403/super-mario-hezonja-deserves-your-attention

DX guys claim, it's a team option, so if Barcelona picks it up, buyout rises to $2 million.

bajaden · May 22, 2015

Gilles said:

I'm not a mind reader, but I assume that they would pick up the option. If it ends up being 2 mil, I believe the team that drafts him can only pony up 500 thousand of that amount, meaning the remaining 1.5 mil would come from him. If true, that's a pretty serious hit. I guess we'll see.

Gilles · May 22, 2015

I'm saying there are two conflicting versions, and behaviour of Pascual, where he kept Mario on the bench, if he was notified, that NBA scouts were in attendance, suggests, that he wanted to discourage Hezonja from coming overseas, which only makes sense, if Mario has a choice to make.

bajaden · May 23, 2015

Gilles said:

Gotcha! Probably a good idea for any interested team to get the facts, what ever they are.

MassachusettsKingsFan · May 23, 2015

bajaden said:

I'll elaborate on my Stauskas point from earlier. I didn't have all day, so my apologies for not explaining my point better, although you may disagree with me even after I explain it ...

He is a 'shooting guard' in the tradition definition of the position, and I would hate to see him play anywhere else, but his skill set for most of last season (we all hope his skill improves, of course) didn't really fit with how the Kings were using shooting guards at the time.

As far as the 'Better with the ball in his hands' cliche, it is a poor one, but I think you knew what I meant. McLemore has an improving, but still poor handle. He's much better moving without the ball, cutting to the lane, coming off screens, etc. And then getting into his offense using the least amount of dribbles as possible. You would agree with this, I think. Ask him to create and he's going to struggle. Last year, to me, Stauskas looked more comfortable the more he handled the ball. I would say the exact opposite for McLemore. 'Stuck between positions' was my poor way of saying that his skill set last season didn't really fit the 'McLemore shooting guard' role. He's not the athlete McLemore is, so the off the ball movement stuff we were trying to run didn't seem to fit what he was capable of last season. He looked most comfortable, again, to me, as a consistent ball handler. You can call it poor coaching for the first half of the season, thats fine, but that is how he played.

I would disagree with you not thinking he was overmatched, but that is fine. When he made good defensive plays, it was a surprise. He wasn't shooting well from deep, he was playing a position in a style that didn't suit him (probably what I should have said instead of 'stuck between positions) and he certainly wasn't helping our defense.

And I actually think Stauskas has more potential than any of our recent draft picks I listed above, but my overall point of Cauley-Stein being less flawed in an 'NBA ready' sense ... I still stand by.

bajaden · May 23, 2015

MassachusettsKingsFan said:

Well were closer to agreement with the clarification. When we start talking about being overmatched, I think that's too general a statement. I think we have to be specific. Offensively or defensively. Against Gerald Henderson, or against James Hardin. On the defensive end, he's definitely a work in progress. He had a lot of bad moments that overshadowed his good moments. Plus, I think we see what were looking for. Grading players has opened my eyes to some extent. It forced me to watch the game through a different lens. When you focus only on one player, its amazing what you see. Not being sure what the defensive scheme of the Kings was makes it harder to criticize a player. Stauskas got burn't more often than not, by cheating off of his man. I don't know if that was his decision, or by design, since he wasn't the only Kings player to do it. When asked to defend the ball in isolation on the perimeter, he did a decent job overall, but took his lumps against elite ballhandlers. To his credit, he never quit on a play, and this should improve with experience, and knowledge of the opposition. His biggest detriment was lack of strength. It affected his ability to fight through screens, and finish at the basket. He knows this, and should improve this off season.

Where I disagree the most is your reference to his creativity. While he doesn't have elite handles, he doesn't have poor handles. I defy you to point out one time last season where his lack of ballhandling got him into trouble. What made him such an interesting player at Michigan, was that he played like a second PG on the floor. He led his team in assists. He had the ability to come off of a screen, read the defense, and either pull up and shoot, turn the corner and go to the basket, where he would either pull up in the lane and shoot, finish at the basket, or dish the ball to a big under the basket. It seemed to come natural to him. We saw none of that until Karl gave him the green light. Up until then, he was just asked to go stand in a corner and wait for the ball that many times never came. It's the equivalent of asking a good rebounder to play solely on the perimeter, and then criticizing him for not rebounding. You either play players to their strength, or trade them somewhere else. You don't try to put a square peg in a round hole.

A lot was made of his poor shooting, and that was the least of my worries. He wasn't a one year wonder like some that come into the NBA. Derrick Williams springs to mind. Nik shot over 40% from the three both years at Michigan, and he shot well in highschool as well. No doubt his confidence took a hit, but the best way to get out of a slump is to shoot your way out of it. Hard to do when your standing in the corner, and getting 4 shots a game at best. You start looking over your shoulder and waiting for the hook every time you miss a shot. If your playing tight, your going to fail. Doesn't matter if your standing at the plate, over a five foot putt, or trying to hit a three. You have to be relaxed, and having fun to be at your best. Been there, done that. I know of what I speak.

Gilles · May 23, 2015

ESPN Insider posted what they call a Consensus WARP ranking, averaging Kevin Pelton's analytic based WARP with Chad Ford's Big Board. Here is the Top 30:

1. Karl-Anthony Towns
2. D'Angelo Russell
3. Kristaps Porzingis
4. Emmanuel Mudiay
5. Jahlil Okafor
6. Myles Turner
7. Frank Kaminsky
8. Tyus Jones
9. Mario Hezonja
10. Justise Winslow
11. R.J. Hunter
12. Cameron Payne
13. Stanley Johnson
14. Delon Wright
15. Sam Dekker
16. Bobby Portis
17. Kelly Oubre Jr.
18. Willie Cauley-Stein
19. Kevon Looney
20. Christian Wood
21. Cedi Osman
22. Michael Frazier II
23. Devin Booker
24. Alan Williams
25. Chris McCullough
26. Trey Lyles
27. Marc Garcia
28. Guillermo Hernangomez
29. Richaun Holmes
30. Briante Weber

Keep good work ESPN, keep good work!

bajaden · May 23, 2015

Thanks for the post Gilles. Interesting, and not surprised to see who is at the top of the list. Also not surprising to see Cauley-Stein down in the 18th position. His forte is defense, and the system is a little flawed in that when it comes to team defense, the results are divided by five, which means that Cauley-Stein would only get credit for 20% of the results. When in fact, he's responsible for more than that. Another flaw is the credit given for blocked shots. With Towns on the team, Stein was asked to guard on the perimeter more, which caused his blocked shot total to decrease. Add in his little used offense, and he ends up at 18. Other than that, the cream usually rises to the top in the WARP grading system.

With Porzingis coming in at number three, I wonder if they equate the overall quality of competition on both sides in that score?

Dime Dropper · May 24, 2015

bajaden said:

If they do, then that would be a good thing for Porzingis, given that he's playing in a league that's at a significantly higher standard than college basketball. Only the big teams ie Kentucky and Duke would stand a chance at being competitive in Liga ACB.

bajaden · May 24, 2015

Dime Dropper said:

Yeah, in that Ryan Blake interview, I think he compared college BB to double A baseball, and european and china BB to triple A baseball. So he agrees with you.

Gilles · May 25, 2015

Just to put in perspective defensive stats as a measurement of athleticism or defensive impact:

name-------------OReb--Stl--Blk-PFs-per 100 poss
Sam Dekker-------4.17--1.1--1.0--2.3 - junior
Sam Dekker-------3.63--1.6-1.2--2.9 - sophomore
Sam Dekker-------3.61--1.9-1.2--3.6 - freshman

Nigel Hayes-------4.34--1.7-0.8-3.9 - sophomore
Nigel Hayes-------3.24--3.0-1.9-9.4 - freshman

Justin Anderson--1.60--1.6-1.3-2.8 - junior
Justin Anderson--2.15--1.1-2.3-4.8 - sophomore
Justin Anderson--2.48-2.3-3.3-3.8 - freshman

Rondae HJ--------4.24-2.4--1.8-5.2 - sophomore
Rondae HJ--------5.40-1.8--2.6-6.0 - freshman

Kawhi Leonard---5.51--2.8--1.1-4.9 - sophomore
Kawhi Leonard---7.04-2.9--1.4-5.2 - freshman

Justise Winslow--2.62--2.8-1.8-5.8 - freshman
Stanley Johnson--4.16--3.2-0.8-5.6 - freshman
Rondae HJ--------5.40--1.8-2.6-6.0 - freshman
Nigel Hayes-------3.24--3.0-1.9-9.4 - freshman
Sam Dekker-------3.61--1.9-1.2--3.6 - freshman
Justin Anderson--2.48-2.3-3.3-3.8 - freshman
Kawhi Leonard---7.04--2.9-1.4-5.2 - freshman

Positional context matters a lot:
Dekker and Hayes were interchangeably SF/PF for Wisconsin in all of their seasons
Justin Anderson was pretty much locked into SF this season, while spending a lot of time at PF as a freshman and some as a sophomore
Justise Winslow was SF/PF (30%/70%),
Stanimal was SF/PF (60%/40%)
RHJ was SF/PF (60%/40%) as a freshman, and SG/SF(20%/80%) this season.
Kawhi was full-time PF with a dose of C both years

Notice, that two teams, that preach positional rather than ball defense, and devote a lot of time practicing with tennis balls to weed out going for the ball, give up much less fouls.

Main point is most players have worse defensive stats as they get more seasoning in college, but their defensive impact and effect on team success increase.

bajaden · May 25, 2015

So if I understand what your saying, is that as players buy more into team defense, their individual accomplishments, stat wise decrease. Is that right? I can see that. If you block a lot of shots your freshman year, but in your junior year, your asked to defend more on the perimeter and help on pick and rolls, it's likely your blocked shots are going to decrease.

Gilles · May 25, 2015

My points are

steals and blocks often come at the expense of the fouls (both Arizona wings as freshmen, Winslow and an extreme case of Nigel Hayes), which doesn't mean, that they played better defense. By statistical metrics Justin Anderson was a monster as a freshman. Does anyone think, that he was a better defender then, than as a junior? Dekker lost 1.0 in stl+blk, but also was getting 1.3 less fouls per 100 possessions. Has he become a worse player with two additional years in college?
prospects from teams, that go for positional defense rather than the ball, are penalized by statistical metrics: they foul much less, which makes defense more effective, but pay for that in pre-draft evaluations

PBNJ85 · May 25, 2015

Good stuff guys

bajaden · May 25, 2015

Gilles said:

I totally agree with your analysis, but do you really think that they pay a price for it in their final evaluation? I get that fans will look at stats and draw wrong conclusions, but do you think that professional NBA scouts do? I'm not a big stats guy. Doesn't mean I don't look at them or don't use them to make a point. But I rely more on the eye test than anything else. It's more laborious because it requires watching a ton of basketball games to get the entire picture, but if your willing to put in the work, you'll have a pretty good idea how good a player is. All stats do is, hopefully confirm what I've seen.

Where I think stats, or analytic's are important, is in breaking down your team offensively and defensively. Analyzing different combinations and matchups. There's a website by Layne Vashro that's pretty cool, although after a while my head starts to hurt. Anyway, enough about that. My head is starting to hurt now. Good points!

Gilles · May 30, 2015

Read SI article about prospects http://www.si.com/nba/2015/05/29/nb...wns-jahlil-okafor-frank-kaminsky-delon-wright, and in "sleeper" section the author mentioned Hollinger's Pure Point Rating (PPR) as a good indicator of NBA success, even though it's just passing/ballhandling metric. DX has PPR in their "Player stats" sections. And surprisingly almost all of the late first and second round picks, that turned out to be quality role playing wings and forwards offensively (Carroll, Danny Green, Parsons, Butler, Draymond Green, Crowder) had PPR around zero or even positive. It's still statistics, that based on assists and TOs, so it heavily depends on players' surroundings (role, teammates, level of competition), and PPR changes in all directions year after year, making it predictive, but not prohibitively so. Still even guys, who came into the league with significantly negative PPR like Lance and Middleton turned it positive once in the NBA: for Lance dramatic change in PPR coincided with breakout 3rd year, Middleton got his PPR to positive as a rookie.
Even though it only points to one side of the floor and doesn't account for shooting ability, it still works very well somehow.
Obviously different groups of players will have different ranges of PPR based on the time they spend with the ball: good PGs have PPR in 2+ territory, wings - (-1.0 to 1.0), while for bigs anything close to (-3.0 to - 2.0) is good for finishers, while (-4.0 to -6.0) is good for heavy post up guys. Again PPR may jump all over the place year-to-year, but being towards the top range of your group tend to indicate ability to be an effective part of offense.

So among late picks guards like TJ Mcconnell, Andrew Harrison or J.P. Tokoto might be decent players, if shooting and defense is up to par. Further evidence, that Treveon Graham, who was Portsmouth Invitational MVP, might become a contributor; Wesley Saunders from Harvard and Rayvonte Rice from Illinois seem to be doing ok. Wells, Petteway and Rashad Vaughn on the other hand were rather bad.

Darrun Hilliard from Villanova looks very good among SFs. He's a young senior, was a good scorer, very good 3pt (quick release) and FT shooter, finished well at the rim, drew his share of fouls and defended very well (had excellent 3.8 stl%, with him on the court Villanova was +27.3 points per 100 possessions, plus he checked out pretty good athletically in Portsmouth). Given that Kings might be only Gay/Casspi deep coming into next season, he would be my primary target among undrafted FAs or a candidate for a late second-round pick.

LeBryan Nash and Jarell Martin look like they might really struggle to fit in. Stanley Johnson has really low PPR among elite wing prospects. This also likely indicates, that Jonathan Holmes is not a poor man's Draymond Green.
Among bigs Jordan Mickey and Cady Lalanne, who are often mentioned as "sleepers" for late first and second rounds respectively, look really bad. Cliff Alexander, Richaun Holmes, Wood and McCulough don't look good either. Christmas didn't do well, but he was not just a finisher with more than half of his FGs coming from post-ups.
WCS does surprisingly well by this metric, while Frank blows everyone out of the water.

Here's a study on value of statistics in determining NBA future. Point 1) suggests, why PPR might have this predictive power:

bajaden · May 30, 2015

I think one of the reasons you have players turning around everything once in the pro's, is the difference in how they were used. If you know a coach is restrictive in what he allows a player to do, like Calapari, you can bet that there's probably something hidden there. I watched Andrew Harrison play in the five on fives at the combine, and he played very well, and no doubt helped himself. Players like Middleton played within their college system, which is some cases doesn't allow them to use all of their tools. In some cases, their asked to play out of position. Plus, you don't have a college 3 second rule in the post like the NBA does, which congests everything. They get into the NBA, where the spacing is better, and bigs can't grow roots in the post, and all of sudden they look a lot better.

It's not the whole answer, but it certainly contributes. By the way, for those that think we might draft Porzingis, here's a tweet from Crandell at new 10.

Jim Crandell ‏@JimCrandell 6h6 hours ago
If you missed my segment last night, Vlade Divac said he doesn't think Kristap Porzingis is ready to play meaningful minutes in the NBA...

Gilles · May 31, 2015

Ok, Vlade needs to learn to keep his mouth shut, if he indeed thinks, that Porzingis isn't anywhere close to being ready. Kings need perception of uncertainty. Whenever you reveal your cards, you can be exploited

funkykingston · May 31, 2015

Gilles said:

Everyone is blowing smoke at this point in the year so when I read something like that I don't ever take it at face value. Instead I start wondering if Vlade (who is more plugged into the international game than most) really likes Porzingis and it trying to dissuade others from taking him or if he really doesn't like him and is trying to make other teams think he's dissuading them from taking Porzingis etc etc.

2015 Draft Prospects:

All-Star

Starter

Starter

Starter

Starter

Starter

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

Starter

G-League

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

Starter

Super Moderator