Amick – Sacramento Kings To Pass On Drummond, Iffy On Kidd-Gilchrist And Barnes?

[roasthawg]

If you ever watched Barnes I think it's pretty clear that he can get his own shot. He has trouble getting to the rim, but his go-to move is an escape dribble, step-back jumper that he can get over pretty much any defender whenever he wants. The problem is he isn't making enough of them yet. I think the draft combine already disproved the 'not much of an athlete' criticisms. He's one of the top 5 most athletic players in the draft based on those evaluations. And I don't know where the "can't play D" comment comes from. He's not a physical defender nor does he get a lot of steals but he is a very good on-the-ball defender. He would occasionally get a little lazy there like most college players do, but the majority of the time he keeps his body between his man and the basket and he's long enough to bother shots.

I know a lot of people don't like his game, but he's also being considered for the #2 pick in the draft. His ceiling is as high as anyone. I don't know if he has the killer instinct to be a star in the NBA, but he does seem to have the skillset, physical tools, and work-ethic to at least be a solid starter and we need a solid starter at SF more than just about anything else.

Excellent post... spot on analysis imo.

 

[Uncia03]

People disagree about Barnes. That's why they had an entire segment on him last night on ESPN- because he is pretty controversial. The "can't play D" comment comes from people who have watched him play every single game of his career - like the announcer for NC. Do you know that in his entire career he wasn't awarded defensive player of the game by his coach one time? (Then in the newspaper I read that one scout thinks he's a good defensive player. Like I said, people disagree about Barnes). I don't think Barnes is going to be a very good defensive player in the NBA. To be a very good defensive player you've got to have very good athleticism. And Barnes doesn't have it. Doesn't have the fluidity or quickness to stand out in that area, imo. Maybe Barnes perfects the step back jumper you mention, but I don't want to pay up #5 on the promise of his step back jumper. In sum, I just don't see the high ceiling that you do. And I really hope that everything I heard from Napier yesterday holds true: the Kings will not draft Barnes.

I just want to chime in the Barnes vs. defense issue.

He certainly isn't a lock-down defender like MKG/Taylor, but I think his defense is not remotely a liability.

It's not a strength, but he was a steady defensive player in both years at UNC. With his size/length/athleticism it will be hard for him to be a poor defensive player if he tries at defense, and if he works hard, he could end up being a good defensive player.

He'll never be an elite one since I don't think he has the mind-set to put 150% on the defensive end, but he is someone who doesn't want to get embarrassed, so he'll use his physical tools to not be a liability at the very minimum.

I'm fine if we select Barnes, though he isn't exactly the guy I want. But I would not pass on him because I was afraid of his defense, as his defense isn't going to be the thing that holds him back from being a great player.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Well yeah its not as easy to draft superstars when you're always picking at the tail end of the 1st round.

The analysis in question attempts to adjust for that.

The point I was making is that you can't dismiss the analysis simply by looking quickly and saying "It doesn't rate Buford well, so it must be meaningless". Buford wasn't behind the run of Spurs draft picks in the late '90s that brought rise to the Spurs-Are-Amazing-Drafters meme; Buford's record has been more middle of the road, the analysis puts him at middle of the road.

 

[Kingster]

I just want to chime in the Barnes vs. defense issue.

He certainly isn't a lock-down defender like MKG/Taylor, but I think his defense is not remotely a liability.

It's not a strength, but he was a steady defensive player in both years at UNC. With his size/length/athleticism it will be hard for him to be a poor defensive player if he tries at defense, and if he works hard, he could end up being a good defensive player.

He'll never be an elite one since I don't think he has the mind-set to put 150% on the defensive end, but he is someone who doesn't want to get embarrassed, so he'll use his physical tools to not be a liability at the very minimum.

I'm fine if we select Barnes, though he isn't exactly the guy I want. But I would not pass on him because I was afraid of his defense, as his defense isn't going to be the thing that holds him back from being a great player.

That supports my point, not detracts from it. If a guy in college is "steady" on D, that's not an argument for him being a good defensive player in the NBA. Now if the guy really had some athleticism that jumped out at you, ok, I could be persuaded that over time he could become a good defensive player. But neither applies to Barnes; thus, I remain skeptical about him on the defensive end.

 

[Gilles]

Amick posted

With the obligatory "things can change" caveat attached, I'm told that the Kings are likely to keep their pick despite Houston's well-chronicled attempts to acquire it. Reports of the Rockets' push to get No. 5 continued on Thursday, but a source with knowledge of the situation said "no deal" when prompted in the afternoon.

There should be an asterisk next to Barnes' name here, because sources said the Kings are very interested in adding a big man to complement center DeMarcus Cousins. For now, I'm thinking they'd either take Barnes here or move back if they decide go big (possibly to No. 7, as they have had recent talks with Golden State about a swap). If it's Barnes, that means the Kings got comfortable with the idea of him as their small forward of the future despite the fact that he refused to work out in Sacramento (as did Robinson, Kidd-Gilchrist and Beal).

If the Kings go big, one possible target is North Carolina power forward John Henson, a two-time ACC Defensive Player of the Year. But Henson isn't believed to be in play until Detroit's No. 9 pick, so there could be a chance to obtain another asset if Sacramento traded down.

Weber State point guard Damian Lillard is an unlikely dark horse because of the team's glut of guards. Also, I've been assured that it's possible that the Kings would pass on Kidd-Gilchrist if he remained available.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20.../nba-mock-draft-2012/index.html#ixzz1z7x9Orui

 

[JB_kings]

Amick posted

Whiplash alert!

 

[rainmaker]

Amick posted

Sounds like misdirection to get Hou to up the anti a bit more.

 

[Tetsujin]

Amick posted

Man, Sam Amick's idea of what the Kings are going to do keeps changing every five minutes.

 

[Tetsujin]

Sounds like misdirection to get Hou to up the anti a bit more.

Not sure what else they have to offer though. Aside from Lowry, Scola, Parsons and Martin, all they really have is draft picks and keep in mind they need to have something to both trade for Dwight and win with him.

 

[hrdboild]

Why doesn't Amick just admit that he hasn't got a clue?

 

[Uncia03]

That supports my point, not detracts from it. If a guy in college is "steady" on D, that's not an argument for him being a good defensive player in the NBA. Now if the guy really had some athleticism that jumped out at you, ok, I could be persuaded that over time he could become a good defensive player. But neither applies to Barnes; thus, I remain skeptical about him on the defensive end.

I have no idea how you took my quote and concluded that I was saying that Barnes was a poor athlete or will be a poor NBA defender.
In fact, if you look at my posts prior to the combine you'll see that I was saying that he wasn't the average/poor athlete that everyone says he was.

He proved at the combine that he was an athlete. Now, I do agree that there is such things as In-Game athleticism vs. Test athleticism. I saw enough flashes of In-Game athleticism from Barnes to not be surprised by the combine numbers.

He's not going to be a defensive liability, I don't know how else I can put it. With his size/length/athleticism in addition to his mindset that he wants to dominate his counter-part, he isn't going to allow himself to be a bad defender. He probably won't be elite, but he'll be just fine in the NBA.

But let's be clear here. You're not going to draft Barnes for his defensive prowess. You'll draft him because of his offense and the fact that he won't be a defensive liability.

You know who scares me as a potential defensive liability who will probably bring good offense? Austin Rivers.
I don't think he has the length/size/build to be a great defender no matter how hard he tries. So if you draft him for his offense, it's probably with the understanding that he could be a defensive liability. That isn't the case with Barnes. You should get good offense and solid defense.

 

[Dime Dropper]

So Cavs are aggressively trying to trade up to two, presumably to take Beal. If they do, rumour is that Washington will take Barnes over MKG. Bobcats, at 4, will likely take Robinson at that spot. Which means MKG is there for us to pass on.

Just a possible scenario that at the moment, isn't too far out of the realms of possibility.

 

[Uncia03]

So Cavs are aggressively trying to trade up to two, presumably to take Beal. If they do, rumour is that Washington will take Barnes over MKG. Bobcats, at 4, will likely take Robinson at that spot. Which means MKG is there for us to pass on.

Just a possible scenario that at the moment, isn't too far out of the realms of possibility.

I think there are a number of ways that MKG can fall to us.

I'm just keeping my expectations as low as I can, because we already got Cousins with the 5th pick, and I don't know if lightning can strike twice, and I don't want to get upset if MKG is off the board at 5.

I'm preparing myself to have either Barnes selected with the 5th pick or seeing us draft Drummond and expecting a trade with Houston later.

I'm not preparing myself to pass on MKG so if that happens....it's going to be hard to be properly composed by the time I arrive in Vegas for Summer League.

 

[Kingster]

I have no idea how you took my quote and concluded that I was saying that Barnes was a poor athlete or will be a poor NBA defender.
In fact, if you look at my posts prior to the combine you'll see that I was saying that he wasn't the average/poor athlete that everyone says he was.

He proved at the combine that he was an athlete. Now, I do agree that there is such things as In-Game athleticism vs. Test athleticism. I saw enough flashes of In-Game athleticism from Barnes to not be surprised by the combine numbers.

He's not going to be a defensive liability, I don't know how else I can put it. With his size/length/athleticism in addition to his mindset that he wants to dominate his counter-part, he isn't going to allow himself to be a bad defender. He probably won't be elite, but he'll be just fine in the NBA.

But let's be clear here. You're not going to draft Barnes for his defensive prowess. You'll draft him because of his offense and the fact that he won't be a defensive liability.

You know who scares me as a potential defensive liability who will probably bring good offense? Austin Rivers.
I don't think he has the length/size/build to be a great defender no matter how hard he tries. So if you draft him for his offense, it's probably with the understanding that he could be a defensive liability. That isn't the case with Barnes. You should get good offense and solid defense.

I think that Barnes is a very average NBA athlete. That's where we differ. We'll see.

 

[Tetsujin]

I think that Barnes is a very average NBA athlete. That's where we differ. We'll see.

He tested off the charts at the combine.

 

[Gilles]

Barnes' quicks are overrated but he's a high-flyer. MKG is very mobile but doesn't jump as high.

 

[Kingster]

He tested off the charts at the combine.

Those charts are worthless. Watch the game.

 

[Glenn]

Drummond just got a huge, huge smack in the face. I don't know why he didn't play well last year but the NBA just let him know what they thought of his play. If it was a motivational problem as compared to some coaching problem, he might come out like a tiger in reaction. It could have been the best thing that could have happened to him. He was in tears and I take no joy in that. Now he's got to remember this day and hit the practice court.

Didn't know where to post this but this seemed as good as any place.