Both Picks - Hypothetical Scenario

[Capt. Factorial]

Let's imagine you're given a choice between two outcomes in this year's draft:

Option 1: Your favorite PG (Rubio/Teague/Jennings) with our pick, Tyler Hansbrough with Houston's pick.

Option 2: Your favorite big (Griffin/Thabeet/Hill) with our pick, Darren Collison with Houston's pick.

Which option would you take?

I'm actually having a really tough time with this myself. Every time I decide, I manage to convince myself the other way. Thoughts?

 

[Entity]

I have a thought but I would get a warning for saying it. so I will put it like this. Any scenerio where we get Tyler Hansbrough is obsurd to put it nicely. Hansbrough will be worthless in the NBA.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I'd rather take Rubio with our first pick, but I want nothing to do with Hansbrough. Please offer an option without his name in it.

 

[nbrans]

What matters most is getting the right player with the first pick. Whether that's Griffin with the 1st pick or trading down to get Teague or just taking Teague if we don't have the first pick, I'm perfectly fine with Brackins or Collison with the second pick depending on who's chosen with the first.

But we really have no use for Tyler Hansbrough.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'd rather take Rubio with our first pick, but I want nothing to do with Hansbrough. Please offer an option without his name in it.

That's the option. It's purely hypothetical, but the thought here is that there aren't going to be any high-ceiling big men left around Houston's pick. Yet, if we take a PG with our #1, we'll be really shallow in big men and we'll need to shore up our rotation, even if it's only for 10-15 minutes per game. Hansbrough is undersized and is unlikely to be any better than a backup at the NBA level, but he's pretty much ready to step in. Do you grab a starting PG and settle for a back-up big at best, or do you grab a starting-capable big man with possible limitations and get a backup PG who MIGHT be able to start? What do you do?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

What matters most is getting the right player with the first pick. Whether that's Griffin with the 1st pick or trading down to get Teague or just taking Teague if we have the first pick, I'm perfectly fine with Brackins or Collison with the second pick depending on who's chosen with the first.

At this point, PG + Brackins would be a great scenario, but probably too optimistic. I don't imagine Brackins will be available for Houston's pick.

 

[Bricklayer]

Given my read on Hansbrough as an NBAer, you are basically asking whether we want to have 1 pick or 2 in this draft. I'll take the two. And despite this being a "point guard draft" its a point guard draft just in volume more than anything else-- there are no obvious Chris Paul's sitting there. So if those are our only options, maybe its better just to complete the frontcourt and then turn all the attention on finding a PG next year. Build inside out.

I have to believe Petrie may come up with some other options though.

 

[Vlade4GM]

That's the option. It's purely hypothetical, but the thought here is that there aren't going to be any high-ceiling big men left around Houston's pick. Yet, if we take a PG with our #1, we'll be really shallow in big men and we'll need to shore up our rotation, even if it's only for 10-15 minutes per game. Hansbrough is undersized and is unlikely to be any better than a backup at the NBA level, but he's pretty much ready to step in. Do you grab a starting PG and settle for a back-up big at best, or do you grab a starting-capable big man with possible limitations and get a backup PG who MIGHT be able to start? What do you do?

You take BPA regardless of who you take with the first pick.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

You take BPA regardless of who you take with the first pick.

Sure, but the question wasn't "if you take a PG first, who do you take second?" The question was: given these two possible outcomes (and only these two possible outcomes) which outcome do you prefer? But so far Brick is the only one who has actually tried to answer the question as posed.

 

[HighTopKicks]

Let's imagine you're given a choice between two outcomes in this year's draft:

Option 1: Your favorite PG (Rubio/Teague/Jennings) with our pick, Tyler Hansbrough with Houston's pick.

Option 2: Your favorite big (Griffin/Thabeet/Hill) with our pick, Darren Collison with Houston's pick.

Which option would you take?

I'm actually having a really tough time with this myself. Every time I decide, I manage to convince myself the other way. Thoughts?

I'm having the same trouble. Griffin is strong, skilled & athletic and will make an immediate impact. Rubio is the floor general we seem to need to eliminate our turnover problem and to stabilize to offense. And, even though PG's usually take time to develop, Rubio should also have an immediate impact.

Your point is well taken, that the quality of the PG's available with the Houston pick exceed the quality of the bigs. But, the one element that always enters into all my evaluations is JT. So, I came up with this question. If JT wasn't on our team, then who would I rather have Griffin or Rubio, and the answer is alway Griffin. Bigs over littles, dominent force down low (scoring or rebounding) over facilitator & jumpshooter.

So, Griffin #1 and Best PG available with Houston's pick. Then look for a starting PG in 2010 thru the draft or FA, when we'll have our most cap space.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I disagree with these scenarios because they are both predicated on who we get with the lesser pick. In reality you worry about getting a superstar with a top 3 pick and the BPA with the lesser pick.

If there is no good starting quality PG or big man at Houston's pick you don't force a pick due to need, we'll likely have another high pick next year and can address that weakness then.

I lean towards a PG this draft because that player will take longer to develop. But if we get the #1 we either need to trade it or draft Griffin.

 

[Emma]

In this draft, option #2. Griffin gives us trade bait. Whether he is that trade bait or not is the question.

 

[Section 101]

You take BPA regardless of who you take with the first pick.

There is also potential financial bonus with Rubio.

You get people in spain and other euros buying Kings merchandise. Plus, with Rubio I bet your guaranteed to get on TNT/ESPN a few games. I don't see any other draftees out there.

 

[BawLa]

Since Rubio is not coming out in this draft, the answer is simple to me...#2. Even if Rubio declared, I wouldn't want Hansborough with the 2nd first rounder.

Thabeet and Lawson...nothing has changed in 3 months.

 

[sidney]

I lean towards drafting Thabeet, then Collison. Sign Sessions then put all the front office energy into getting rid of Beno and Nocioni so we can get some real talent at SF.

Wouldn't look at Hansbrough until the 2nd rounder. At that point he might be a decent value. Someone always seems to drop though so you probably just wait and see. Last year it was Chalmers and DeAndre Jordan in the 2nd round which were good value.

 

[hrdboild]

It really just depends on which players you like. If there's a player you're targeting you should be able to leverage your draft position and whatever other assets you have to acquire that player. That's what Portland does every year and that's why their roster is so good. They only draft players they want. We're already in a good position this year with two picks (and a high second round pick). If one of those is the #1 pick we're in an even better position. Oklahoma City is in a position to overpay to get their hometown kid. Some other teams are probably in a position to sell their picks to offset some of their financial deficit. What I'd like to see (without even getting into specifics of which players) is Petrie aggressively utilizing our two picks to acquire the players he wants, not just whoever happens to fall to our pick. Expecting to complete the rebuild project through one draft is ridiculous. It doesn't even matter if we get a PG or a big man. We need the best player or players we can get however we can get them.

 

[fnordius]

If option #1 had included Jerome Jordan instead of Hansbrough, I might be torn. Jordan is a project, but I think this is the perfect time for a project. "NBA ready" might be a negative right now IMO. And I think he fits team needs better than Hansbrough.

I'd consider Brackins if he were available, too... but that's iffy.

So I'll take door #2.

 

[Nighthawk1]

This is a tough one, I chose option #2 (and I completely ignore the late round draft pick in the scenario's). Basing #2 on if we can get Griffin, and Griffin alone. If griffin isn't there then I might go with #1.

 

[6th]

Now you had to go and make it tough. While I really want Rubio, you had to go and pair him with Hansbrough. I don't like that at all.

While I like Griffin, I want a top PG more. Having said that, I have to go with choice #2. Griffin will be fantastic help in the front court. You're just going to make me wait to get a starting PG.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Between your two outcomes, #2 is the easy choice.

It's going to be much more complicated than that, though. Does Rubio declare? Could we leverage a Jeff Green from OKC if they're desperate for Griffin, or an Anthony Randolph from Golden State? Lot's of possibilities out there come June, unfortunately none of them include a franchise player it seems.

 

[Section 101]

Since Rubio is not coming out in this draft

Really?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2009/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=FordDraftWatch-090227


Who's Hot


Ricky Rubio, PG, Spain
Rubio isn't dominating in Spain, but he's getting better and better by the game. A number of NBA scouts and executives are just getting back from Spain and, after watching Rubio play in Copa del Rey, I haven't heard one that doesn't have him ranked in the top three. Most of them have him at No. 2 now, ahead of Georgetown's Greg Monroe.
Rubio's position in the top three is significant for one big reason: He has a huge buyout from his team in Spain. To afford the buyout, he really needs to be a top-three pick. Publicly, the mood has been pessimistic that Rubio would be in this draft, with a series of international stories claiming Rubio is staying overseas and other draft sites pulling him from their 2009 mock drafts. Privately, his agent, Dan Fegan, has been working on this for months, and we've been getting the same signals all along: Rubio is entering this year's draft.
Rubio still needs to work on his jumper and get stronger, but his floor leadership and energy are just remarkable. He's a special playmaker.

 

[LPKingsFan]

This is being discussed ad nauseum in the Rubio thread. His agent says he's coming out, his teammates say he's not. Both sides clearly have their own motives. Personally, I'm sitting out on the Rubio debate until mid-May when he has to decide one way or another.

 

[Smills91]

Sure, but the question wasn't "if you take a PG first, who do you take second?" The question was: given these two possible outcomes (and only these two possible outcomes) which outcome do you prefer? But so far Brick is the only one who has actually tried to answer the question as posed.

I'd take the BIG player with the lotto scenario first. Quality PG's can be found later in drafts more typically than quality bigs.

Also, I think the draft of 2010 is even more PG rich than this draft in both volume and quality. So I'd take Griffin/Monroe/Hill/Thabeet this draft in the lotto, then nab a Collison/Lawson/T-Williams with the Houston pick. Then look at the LIKELY lotto pick next year to nab a PG like Wall/HollidayMills next year.