De'Aaron Fox:

Status
Not open for further replies.
steelevt said:
What if you never get that star? Watching a team tank year after year can get tiresome. I'd prefer a team compete because I actually like watching my team win. Teams rarely go from bottom dweller to contenders in a season. You take steps. Get to the playoffs first, draw some talented free agents who want to join a winning team, and build chemistry.
Click to expand...

If we never get another star again in our lifetimes, then so be it. I know my view is a bit different on this and I don't doubt you need to take baby steps in order to build a winning culture, chemistry & slowly put together a contender. The question now remains, would you like to be the Atlanta Hawks of the West and make the playoffs year after year without much to show for? Yeah it's fun watching playoff basketball, especially if your team is in it. The end game here should be a cornerstone to build around, that is the hardest thing to attain.
 
Ozymandias said:
You don't win in the later rounds of the playoffs without a centerpeice, but I'd actually cite that Detroit Pistons team as an excellent example of just having great all around quality and a disruptive style that was good enough to get the job done.

The Kings are positioned to wait 3-5 years like that, most of these youngins still will be in their mid 20's, I really think the outlook is 2 seasons, Vlade's said that after the Cousins trade and I believe him. Lets say they hit a homerun with the 34th pick, and get two worthy players at 5 and 10, the ramifications could be awesome, there's game-changers to be had. It's all about plucking low-hanging fruit, thats the move,to get picky and choosey about what to pluck isn't my style.
Click to expand...

The Pistons are a very rare case of a team winning without any franchise player but a lot of very good, solid all-star worthy players. That said, I really don't see a team like that anytime soon in the league and I'd love to be proven wrong. The cornerstone player can be on the roster or maybe that player will be one from this draft class or next. The next three seasons will tell us a lot.
 
Blob said:
Once again we have prominent Kings Fan dot com member contradicting himself within one post. First you are "NOT a Tatum supporter" then proceed to say he is more "polished scorer" than an NBA All-Star and soon to be max player? Then you say he will have little trouble being a team's #1 scorer on any team. Then you compare him to a future Hall of Fame player in Paul Pierce? Am I in the Twilight Zone?
Click to expand...

You may need to take into account that Čarolija is not, I believe, a native English speaker, but the intent seemed clear to me: "I am not a fan of Tatum specifically, but a fan of getting a centerpiece player. I think that there are multiple centerpiece players in this draft, and amongst those centerpiece players are Tatum and Fox."

Raise your game or prepare to be Blob'd.
Click to expand...

I, for one, would prefer it if you stopped "Blob'ing" people so much, especially if "Blob'ing" people means (as it appears to) searching for small or even nonexistent inconsistencies in others' comments, pointing those out, and then loudly declaring victory. Not every conversation has to be a fight.
 
I think it would be completely irrational and irresponsible to trade the 10th overall pick, just to move up 2 spots in the draft. There's a very very good chance Fox is there at 5.... so why are trade up for him? Even if he's gone, there's still lots of talented players left at 5.

What's the justification for trading the 10th pick to guarantee Fox?
Ozymandias said:
Well it's no surprise you're a Jayson Tatum supporter, he's seemingly the player you're looking for. It is possible with the proper skill development/project to develop into a go-to player over time, look no further than Gordon Hayward (if he's good enough to be a go-to player in the playoffs vs top-teir teams is debatable IMHO, I'd say he's more of a really good second gun).

There's some possible go-to players squarely on the radar for next years draft; Luke Doncic, Michael Porter Jr and I'd say Collin Sexton.

I'm not the best person to talk to about this stuff. I'm in the take the BPA boat always, drafting for team need isn't exactly my style I don't think thats the right way to look at this sorta stuff tbh, worry about getting the best players/projects (AKA strongest eventual trade assets) and fill in the rest of the pieces later when you're holding loads of assets, sort of like what the Celtics and soon enough the 76ers are doing, I call it the asset acquisition stage, it proceeds the win-now stage which seems like its 2 seasons away for the Kings IMO (seeing as they don't have a 2019 draftpick, it's then time to see what the squads made of)..
Click to expand...
While it's not bad to look ahead at next year's draft, there's always this repeating idea of, "next years draft will be better than this year". I think it's best for the Kings to focus all their attention on this year's draft. we have 2 top 10 picks in a very good draft. No need to look at 2018.. we have no clue where we'll end up on the standings.

I think the more important step for the Kings is to focus on 5&10, so they can maximize their assets and value.
 
206Fan said:
I think it would be completely irrational and irresponsible to trade the 10th overall pick, just to move up 2 spots in the draft. There's a very very good chance Fox is there at 5.... so why are trade up for him? Even if he's gone, there's still lots of talented players left at 5.

What's the justification for trading the 10th pick to guarantee Fox?

While it's not bad to look ahead at next year's draft, there's always this repeating idea of, "next years draft will be better than this year". I think it's best for the Kings to focus all their attention on this year's draft. we have 2 top 10 picks in a very good draft. No need to look at 2018.. we have no clue where we'll end up on the standings.

I think the more important step for the Kings is to focus on 5&10, so they can maximize their assets and value.
Click to expand...
The most I would offer to move up would be 5 and the second round pick. That is a legit offer to move up 2 spots. At 34 you can get a guy who is good enough to make the roster but is not a top 10 talent. Just take the 2 very good lotto picks and call it a day.
 
The reason you would make a deal to move up to grab Fox, or whoever, is because you have a vision of the team your trying to assemble. You know how you want your team to play, and the type of players you need. You do a deal that may seem overpriced, a reach, ect , because your the one who knows what your trying to build. Finally, you deal 5/10 to get player X or whatever scenario, because player X is crucial to your vision coming to fruition and you have one shot to draft him.

Our front office has been visionless for an eternity it feels. IF they have a direction, a vision finally , then you do everything you can to put it together. Every step of the building is fragile and time and situationaly sensitive. If player X is vital, you get him. Period.

I am not saying what is or isn't, just answering the "why?"
 
Suicide King said:
The reason you would make a deal to move up to grab Fox, or whoever, is because you have a vision of the team your trying to assemble. You know how you want your team to play, and the type of players you need. You do a deal that may seem overpriced, a reach, ect , because your the one who knows what your trying to build. Finally, you deal 5/10 to get player X or whatever scenario, because player X is crucial to your vision coming to fruition and you have one shot to draft him.

Our front office has been visionless for an eternity it feels. IF they have a direction, a vision finally , then you do everything you can to put it together. Every step of the building is fragile and time and situationaly sensitive. If player X is vital, you get him. Period.

I am not saying what is or isn't, just answering the "why?"
Click to expand...


I'd also like to add that the Kings are in a potentially unique position to do that without having to touch anything have been building with already. I think trading chunks of a young budding roster to satisfy the desire for a targeted player is much different and possibly more damaging than moving a combination of picks to get the same job done.
 
Last edited:
The only conceivable deal to move up would be with Philly and we would trade the 5/10 for 3 and to extinguish 2019. That nets us the player we want (Ball/Jackson/Fox) and unencumbers our picks. We can still get a nice second unit SF or PG at 34. Philly does it as, probably, part of their roster re-balancing around Simmons/Embiid and lock in present value on our pick. They could walk out with Monk/Markannen and be set for years. Of course, we could do the same if we're cool with Monk, but it seems like no one is. Philly could also package 10 with Okafor for another piece they like.

Frankly, I don't think any option at 10 is worth missing out on Ball/Jackson/Fox, but it's always possible one of them slides.
 
Really hope we don't trade up. Imagine last year's draft if we didn't get Skal... And he was our third first rounder. The more darts you throw the better chance you have at hitting a bullseye. Just because a guy seems like a no brainer now doesn't mean that'll be the case this time next year. If Fox is there at five, great... If not another great talent will be.
 
Sactown ExPat said:
The only conceivable deal to move up would be with Philly and we would trade the 5/10 for 3 and to extinguish 2019. That nets us the player we want (Ball/Jackson/Fox) and unencumbers our picks. We can still get a nice second unit SF or PG at 34. Philly does it as, probably, part of their roster re-balancing around Simmons/Embiid and lock in present value on our pick. They could walk out with Monk/Markannen and be set for years. Of course, we could do the same if we're cool with Monk, but it seems like no one is. Philly could also package 10 with Okafor for another piece they like.

Frankly, I don't think any option at 10 is worth missing out on Ball/Jackson/Fox, but it's always possible one of them slides.
Click to expand...

IF the Kings could trade #5 & #10 for #3 and their own 2019 pick back I would do that in a heartbeat.

The optics on it aren't great - essentially Divac would have traded Cousins for Buddy Hield and the ability to counter the effects of his own terrible trade. But living in the here and now getting Fox and the 2019 pick back instead of Isaac or Tatum and Collins, Markkanen, Mitchell etc would be well worth it to me.

Now if DraftExpress' current mock were to be how the draft unfolded and the Kings got Tatum (or Isaac but Tatum is who DX has at 5) and Smith at 10 I don't know if Fox and the 2019 pick would be equal value. But Smith is a tough one for me.
 
funkykingston said:
IF the Kings could trade #5 & #10 for #3 and their own 2019 pick back I would do that in a heartbeat.

The optics on it aren't great - essentially Divac would have traded Cousins for Buddy Hield and the ability to counter the effects of his own terrible trade. But living in the here and now getting Fox and the 2019 pick back instead of Isaac or Tatum and Collins, Markkanen, Mitchell etc would be well worth it to me.

Now if DraftExpress' current mock were to be how the draft unfolded and the Kings got Tatum (or Isaac but Tatum is who DX has at 5) and Smith at 10 I don't know if Fox and the 2019 pick would be equal value. But Smith is a tough one for me.
Click to expand...
Philly would never do that... I really doubt they'd give up our unprotected '19 pick for #10 this year. Let alone move back from three to five in the process.

Consider me in if they would though!
 
roasthawg said:
Philly would never do that... I really doubt they'd give up our unprotected '19 pick for #10 this year. Let alone move back from three to five in the process.

Consider me in if they would though!
Click to expand...

I don't think they would either. The only way I could see them possibly doing so is if:

(1) Ball doesn't fall to 3
(2) Monk is really their guy
(3) They really want Markkenen or Mitchell or another prospect likely to be there at 10

Both Colangelos have said that the 76ers have pivoted from asset collecting to trying to win now. So maybe it's possible but I agree, not likely.
 
roasthawg said:
Philly would never do that... I really doubt they'd give up our unprotected '19 pick for #10 this year. Let alone move back from three to five in the process.
Click to expand...

At first glance, I wouldn't think so either. But this is considered such a good and deep draft that #10 this year could be a better pick than say #5 in 2019. If you go by history, the Kings are typically drafting 7th or 8th under the current format. Sixers should take that for data :)

Honestly, I'm thinking I'd rather the Kings keep #10 this season and give up the 2019 because I really doubt the Kings pick will be top 3 even if they are still lottery bound. 33 seasons of history tell us that. And I think they may well find better talent in this draft than 2 years from now.
 
Ozymandias said:
Again I agree with you on most of this stuff. I just worry about pigeon-holing the pick.. Thats really it. I'm really not a big fan of whats called 'hero-ball' I thoroughly believe in building a team just worrying about quality and depth and ball-movement, because even if you don't have a true #1 at that point, whoever is leading the team in scoring, it's possible you could dupe some team into paying for him like he's a #1 in trade and finding that dude somewhere else.

The thing is with this draft is it's really, really deep, so much so that we'll see some nice contributors from those who go undrafted.. I question just how top-heavy it really is, there's no doubt that the 5 and 10 fall in the upper tiers of this draft, which seems to drop off a bit near the end of the lottery.

I'm not so sure about the 3-5 year outlook thing either. I think, like Vlade, that it can be done in 2, they could be pushing 40 wins by then ez. I really don't think we're gonna see much of a talent drop off in these drafts this decade though, there's a tidal wave of talent incoming to the league - I'm sure of it.

If Papagiannis, who's got go-to moves already, can really show big leaps of improvement the outlook will change here quickly, that might be asking too much, there's a reason they took him so high though.
Click to expand...
WOW!

If you think you can rebuild in 2 years then I am not sure what is there to discuss really. You do realize that the Kings would be the one and only small market team to do it in that time frame in like the whole history of the NBA? You are backing the Kings of all teams to do that? The team that can't get out of its own way?!?!?!

Long are the days where you can pull wool over the eyes of other teams and sell them an asset that is not quite as good as the numbers suggest. Teams are a lot more professional these days and they are not going to overpay for a player because he leads a bad team in scoring. That just does not happen in modern day NBA. The only team that to this date could be duped would have been the Kings themselves because of owners obsession with shooting and 3pts.

Detroit Piston that won that championships in the 2000s is the exception of the rule and not the rule. No other team has won a championship in the NBA that has not had a superstar centerpiece to build around...at least 1 and in a lot of cases more of them.

Ball movement does not need to be stopped with a centerpiece. The centerpiece of the the golden era Kings was Chris Webber but that was one of the best passing, ball movements and player movement teams ever. Look at the Spurs....they have always had multiple stars but the ball movement was always there. Same with Warriors now days.

Bottom line is you are not going far unless you have centerpiece or two...a franchise level player or two. Once you get those then filling out the roster to complement them is not that difficult. Warriors traded for Bogut and signed Igoudala once they established that they had their core in Curry (centre piece), Thompson and Green. Kings traded for Christie and Bibby and signed Jackson and Pollards once they realized that the core of Webber (centre piece), Vlade and Peja had something going for them. Its just how contenders are built. You don't collect a bunch of complementary pieces and hope that they fit with the center piece once you get your hands on one. Any other way is just treading water. The plan of a quick 2 year turnaround is what got the franchise in this position to start off with....i.e. over a decade without a play off appearance let alone being a genuine contender. Any shortcuts will result in more mediocrity that will result in yet another "quick rebuild" attempt that will lead nowhere.
 
Blob said:
Once again we have prominent Kings Fan dot com member contradicting himself within one post. First you are "NOT a Tatum supporter" then proceed to say he is more "polished scorer" than an NBA All-Star and soon to be max player? Then you say he will have little trouble being a team's #1 scorer on any team. Then you compare him to a future Hall of Fame player in Paul Pierce? Am I in the Twilight Zone?

You are NOT supporter of guys you compare to current All-Stars and future Hall-of-Famers? Tell me, what am I missing? Would you be more inclined to latch your wagon of support to the next Jimmer, Stauskas or Jason Thompson?

I will continue to challenge fallacy of the opinions of those who distance themselves from a prospect in one breath then later compare them favorably to highly successful NBA players. You can NOT have it both ways and hope to retain credibility. If Tatum is as good as you say he is, i.e. #1 scorer on any team with little trouble, more refined than Hayward and Pierce-like, then let's draft him!!!! If he's this good, why would you NOT be a supporter of him?! He will be a 10-time all-star!

Raise your game or prepare to be Blob'd. :cool:

Here's my stance: I do NOT like Tatum, Smith Jr. or Ball for multitude of reasons I have detailed extensively. Accordingly I am not going to predict their careers are destined to play out similar to Melo, Paul or Kidd. Why would I? I don't think they are that good. This is called logic. Frankly, some of you ought to try it. I conclude this rant by saying you claim you are fan who wants a "centerpiece" then you basically proceed to define Tatum as a centerpiece?! Yet you are not a fan of Tatum?! Unbelievable.

o_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_O
Click to expand...
Spare my your psychotic sniping. It's getting highly predictable!
 
Čarolija said:
WOW!

If you think you can rebuild in 2 years then I am not sure what is there to discuss really. You do realize that the Kings would be the one and only small market team to do it in that time frame in like the whole history of the NBA? You are backing the Kings of all teams to do that? The team that can't get out of its own way?!?!?!

Long are the days where you can pull wool over the eyes of other teams and sell them an asset that is not quite as good as the numbers suggest. Teams are a lot more professional these days and they are not going to overpay for a player because he leads a bad team in scoring. That just does not happen in modern day NBA. The only team that to this date could be duped would have been the Kings themselves because of owners obsession with shooting and 3pts.

Detroit Piston that won that championships in the 2000s is the exception of the rule and not the rule. No other team has won a championship in the NBA that has not had a superstar centerpiece to build around...at least 1 and in a lot of cases more of them.

Ball movement does not need to be stopped with a centerpiece. The centerpiece of the the golden era Kings was Chris Webber but that was one of the best passing, ball movements and player movement teams ever. Look at the Spurs....they have always had multiple stars but the ball movement was always there. Same with Warriors now days.

Bottom line is you are not going far unless you have centerpiece or two...a franchise level player or two. Once you get those then filling out the roster to complement them is not that difficult. Warriors traded for Bogut and signed Igoudala once they established that they had their core in Curry (centre piece), Thompson and Green. Kings traded for Christie and Bibby and signed Jackson and Pollards once they realized that the core of Webber (centre piece), Vlade and Peja had something going for them. Its just how contenders are built. You don't collect a bunch of complementary pieces and hope that they fit with the center piece once you get your hands on one. Any other way is just treading water. The plan of a quick 2 year turnaround is what got the franchise in this position to start off with....i.e. over a decade without a play off appearance let alone being a genuine contender. Any shortcuts will result in more mediocrity that will result in yet another "quick rebuild" attempt that will lead nowhere.
Click to expand...

I know they can rebuild in 2 years.. All they've gotta do is make the right moves, the flexibility and foundation is there, call me an optimist. It can be done in sort of like a bulking and cutting routine. I don't think it's gonna be a quick rebuild, 2 seasons (3-off seasons) is a long time, enough time to open up a window for many years of consecutive playoff runs.

Tatum isn't a ball-stopper either, I really think he's the player you seem to be describing.

I really do think they took Papagiannis so high because they believe in his "go-to" moves. Skal has potential to drain shots from all over the floor and all sorts of releases, he's got a supremely deft touch. They have some peices in place already, Buddy obviously can shoot the lights out.
 
DBne1EkU0AAZycN.jpg:large
 
Ozymandias said:
I know they can rebuild in 2 years.. All they've gotta do is make the right moves, the flexibility and foundation is there, call me an optimist. It can be done in sort of like a bulking and cutting routine. I don't think it's gonna be a quick rebuild, 2 seasons (3-off seasons) is a long time, enough time to open up a window for many years of consecutive playoff runs.

Tatum isn't a ball-stopper either, I really think he's the player you seem to be describing.

I really do think they took Papagiannis so high because they believe in his "go-to" moves. Skal has potential to drain shots from all over the floor and all sorts of releases, he's got a supremely deft touch. They have some peices in place already, Buddy obviously can shoot the lights out.
Click to expand...

I think there's a difference between rebuilding in two years, and getting the results of that rebuild in two years. I think it's possible to have all the core pieces in place in two years, but we won't get the total results of that for another two years or so, unless the basketball god's really smile upon us. I may be splitting hairs here, but to my old eye's, your both right.
 
I would love Fox as a King and think he's a great fit next to Buddy, but I don't think we should trade up for him. I don't think he's enough of a sure thing to merit that kind of move especially considering the other talent in this draft. I sure hope he falls though.
 
Chupacabra said:
FWIW I was just reading youtube comments of a sixers radio show and there were very few sixers fans that wanted Fox.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they're spoiled though, too many assets has them getting too picky. it's actually dumb as far as I'm concerned he'd be a great fit there, they'd run the break at warp speed with him and Simmons and Embiid (and to a lesser extent Tim Luwawu).

Collin Sexton in next years draft (fastest / quickest PG in that pool) might be a better fit for them tho, he's a pure scoring guard tho, not a pure PG.
 
bajaden said:
I think there's a difference between rebuilding in two years, and getting the results of that rebuild in two years. I think it's possible to have all the core pieces in place in two years, but we won't get the total results of that for another two years or so, unless the basketball god's really smile upon us. I may be splitting hairs here, but to my old eye's, your both right.
Click to expand...
To be more specific I think they can be one of the team with the biggest year-over-year win increases and go from 30 something wins to 50.
 
Ozymandias said:
To be more specific I think they can be one of the team with the biggest year-over-year win increases and go from 30 something wins to 50.
Click to expand...
I believe the same thing... Youth matures and the team gets better. I'm expecting to struggle again next year but to take a huge leap in 2019.
 
Ozymandias said:
Yeah, they're spoiled though, too many assets has them getting too picky. it's actually dumb as far as I'm concerned he'd be a great fit there, they'd run the break at warp speed with him and Simmons and Embiid (and to a lesser extent Tim Luwawu).

Collin Sexton in next years draft (fastest / quickest PG in that pool) might be a better fit for them tho, he's a pure scoring guard tho, not a pure PG.
Click to expand...
I agree with most sixers fans that Fox is a bad fit for them. Simmons drives and kicks to Fox?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
[Rumor] Trade rumor: Spurs reportedly 'positioning' for Kings' De'Aaron Fox; Says he's a Manu Ginobili fan
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Caccia
Caccia
Y
Kings blow out De'Aaron Fox and Spurs in PG's return to Sacramento
Replies
0
Views
160
Yahoo Sports
Y
C
De'Aaron Fox gives blunt response to mistake that lost Kings game
Replies
1
Views
234
AaronPDX
AaronPDX
R
De'Aaron Fox aims to continue torrid run as Kings host Hawks
Replies
0
Views
167
Reuters
R
A
De'Aaron Fox scores 49 points to lead Kings to 121-117 over Jazz
Replies
0
Views
167
Associated Press
A
Back
Top