Doncic or Porter...Why Not Both?

[twslam07]

CHI Gets: #10, #26, & Willie Cauley-Stein
CHI Gives: #7 & Robin Lopez
Why for CHI? Allows them to still grab a SF in Mik. Bridges, Mil. Bridges, or Knox while still getting a young C that complements Markkanen well, and another 1st round pick. Meanwhile, they shed Lopez's contract giving them $47.5 mil in cap space without resigning Lavine, Vonleh, Nwaba, Kilpatrick, or Zipser.

PHI Gets: Buddy Hield
PHI Gives: Jerryd Bayless, #10, & #26
Why for PHI? The 76ers get a very cheap replacement for Reddick who can stretch the floor with the best of them while also clearing enough cap space to sign LeBron (35% of the cap).

SAC Gets: #7, Jerryd Bayless, & Robin Lopez
SAC Gives: Buddy Hield & Wilie Cauley-Stein
Why for SAC? The Kings get another top 10 pick in this year's draft by moving some young guys that be overshadowed soon (Bogdanovic & Giles) while taking on contracts that expire with the rest of their veterans (giving them $67.5 mil in cap space for the 2019 offseason).

----------------------------------------------------------

PG - Fox / Mason / Bayless
SG - Bogdanovic / Temple / Shumpert
SF - Doncic / Jackson
PF - Porter / Labissiere / Randolph
C - Giles / Lopez / Koufos

 

[KingsFanSince85]

A few weeks ago I proposed trying to get another pick in the 6-10 range to take Porter or Mikal Bridges .. whichever SF they like best. It didn’t seem many were on board with the idea.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I think it makes more sense if we get Ayton that we would do something like this than if it's Doncic.

 

[twslam07]

I think it makes more sense if we get Ayton that we would do something like this than if it's Doncic.

I think it makes sense either way.

Similar to how a lot of NFL teams shy away from drafting RBs high in the draft, I have a similar mindset with big men. It’s looking like it’s becoming harder and harder for bigs to lead a team to and elite level. Now that’s not to say I wouldn’t draft a big high in the draft but they would have to be an absolute stud. Ayton’s defense and desire have me leaving him out of that group. Not only that, but I’d rather see what we have in Giles. Giles should be our C as I think his shooting as a PF is going to limit this team’s potential.

Coming back to the Doncic/Porter pairing, I’m thinking about this long term.

Doncic is 6’8” and 230 lbs right now. At 19, he already looks pretty strong. Getting on a good diet and a NBA weight lifting program will turn that 230 lbs into a chiseled 220-240 lbs which I think will allow him to swing between both SF and PF.

Porter is 6’11” with a 7’0” wingspan and 9’1” standing reach. That’s plenty of height and length to play PF next to Doncic. Despite all that height, he only weighs 211 pounds. And his bodfat % came in at 6.4%. That’s pretty high for a guy that is almost 7’0” and only weighs 211 pounds. He doesn’t have the strength to play PF yet but considering his athleticism at his current weight and body fat %, it’s realistic to think we could see that athleticism improve as he gets on a NBA regime. He’s a guy who I can see get to 230-240 lbs considering his frame.

So projecting out into the future, we could have a front court of:

SF - 6’8” 220-240 lbs (Doncic)
PF - 6’11” 230-240 lbs (Porter)
C - 6’11” 240-250 lbs (Giles)

That could be one of the best frontcourts in the league if things go our way. In the early years, side they may get pushed around while they are building up their strength but I’m more concerned with the future vision then how they will necessarily fair right now.

 

[Joshoua]

I’d rather have Buddy over Porter yes coming along smoothly and fits cause he’s not ball dominate.

Top 5 shooter

 

[kingsfan1984]

I love it for a the stated reasons. I think porter will go before chi picks though.
If budd and wcs plus cap space can be turned into Porter i will be very excited for the future

 

[ESP47]

I'm not one to overrate our players but I have a hard time giving up Buddy Hield, especially for a high risk prospect in MPJ. I just feel like Buddy is about to turn into a really solid player this year if the damn coach would just give him the minutes. I'd probably do it if Bamba was sitting there on the board still.

 

[twslam07]

I’d rather have Buddy over Porter yes coming along smoothly and fits cause he’s not ball dominate.

Top 5 shooter

For a guy like Porter, it's easy to say that he has the potential to be the best player in this draft. If Buddy was reinserted into the draft, could you say the same thing about him? I don't think so.

Buddy has looked good, but good is the enemy of great. We're not getting anywhere without star talent, and Porter has that potential while Hield's handles, playmaking, athleticism, size, length, & age are all working against him.

 

[twslam07]

I'm not one to overrate our players but I have a hard time giving up Buddy Hield, especially for a high risk prospect in MPJ. I just feel like Buddy is about to turn into a really solid player this year if the damn coach would just give him the minutes. I'd probably do it if Bamba was sitting there on the board still.

I don't want to reiterate what I said about drafting big men in my post above, but Bamba has the potential to be a non-factor in today's NBA if his shot doesn't develop and his defense doesn't translate to being elite.

Besides, we have a very, very cheap investment (#20 pick) on a big who could end up being great at C (Giles). Let's use our valuable picks on perimeter oriented players and use mid to late picks & free agency to find a diamond in the rough for our big man spots.

In a way, we've done this. We took both Labissiere & Giles late in the draft. Both guys had excellent upside, but at the same time, it's not at the expense of a very valuable pick (e.g., top 10). We should continue with this approach.

 

[206Fan]

I love the idea of trading for another pick to draft MPJ, but I don't think I'd do it if we drafted Doncic at #2.

I think MPJ could eventually slide down to PF, but as of right now, they both play the same position. There would be too many on-ball players in the starting lineup as well.

I'd only do the trade if we drafted a big man at #2.

 

[twslam07]

I love the idea of trading for another pick to draft MPJ, but I don't think I'd do it if we drafted Doncic at #2.

I think MPJ could eventually slide down to PF, but as of right now, they both play the same position. There would be too many on-ball players in the starting lineup as well.

I'd only do the trade if we drafted a big man at #2.

Sure, no doubting early struggles with Doncic & Porter having a hard time dealing with the strength of NBA PFs, but we're not competing today. Our sights should be set on the future, and a Doncic & Porter SF/PF combo should work after they have had a few NBA seasons to work on their bodies.

In the meantime, you could have Labissiere start at PF so he's matching up with the stronger PFs in the league with Porter taking back-up minutes both at SF & PF against weaker competition. Or perhaps the Kings red shirt him like they did with Giles to make sure he's completely healthy and to give him a full year to increase his strength and core so he's ready for a full NBA season. Below is an example rotation of how it could work to make sure Porter isn't consistently getting punished by bigger, stronger players.

PG - Fox (30 min) / Mason (18 min)
SG - Bogdanovic (30 min) / Doncic (18 min)
SF - Doncic (12 min) / Porter (18 min) / Jackson (18 min)
PF - Labissiere (26 min) / Porter (12 min) / Giles (10 min)
C - Giles (16 min) / Lopez (16 min) / Koufos (16 min)

Fox - 30 min
Bogdanovic - 30 min
Doncic - 30 min
Porter - 30 min
Giles - 26 min
Labissiere - 26 min
Mason - 18 min
Jackson - 18 min
Lopez - 16 min
Koufos - 16 min

 

[Hoovtrain]

Not bad

 

[ESP47]

I don't want to reiterate what I said about drafting big men in my post above, but Bamba has the potential to be a non-factor in today's NBA if his shot doesn't develop and his defense doesn't translate to being elite.

Besides, we have a very, very cheap investment (#20 pick) on a big who could end up being great at C (Giles). Let's use our valuable picks on perimeter oriented players and use mid to late picks & free agency to find a diamond in the rough for our big man spots.

In a way, we've done this. We took both Labissiere & Giles late in the draft. Both guys had excellent upside, but at the same time, it's not at the expense of a very valuable pick (e.g., top 10). We should continue with this approach.

I understand completely where you're coming from as I've ran through the same thought process. Hield is one of the best shooters in the game. If he's properly utilized, he's a very valuable player. If his defensive improvements are for real, this guy will be a starter for a long time. We just need a coach that knows how to utilize one of the best shooters in the NBA. If you put Hield on the Cavs in place of JR Smith, I would bet a decent amount of money that the Cavs wouldn't have been ran ragged in all those game 7s this year and they would have won game 1 of the Finals.

It's just Bamba has the best shot at being an elite Gobert type rim protector. No one else in this draft has as big of a shot at it than he does. JJJ blocks a lot of shots but he fouls twice as much as Bamba because he needs to be super aggressive to get blocks where Bamba can still get the block while only playing half as aggressively due to his all time largest wingspan. I don't condone taking Bamba at 2 but I would take him in a trade scenario like you've stated because we have no clue what our other young bigs will be able to do in a couple of years. If more than one of these guys develop, they can be used as trade bait. Actual valuable trade bait and not of the acquire Shumpert and Caboclo variety.

I just think MPJ has a very low chance of becoming a #1 scorer. I think he is riskier than Trae Young and that's ignoring his back injury and just going off of his game.

If I could keep Hield and give up nearly anything else for a 10-15 pick, I'd do it in a heart beat because I could live with drafting a bust by only giving WCS/fodder and cap space for that. There's still a lot of good players to be had in that range that could fill a need for us.

 

[pdizo916]

Philadelphia gives up way too much in that trade. There's no way in hell they would do this trade. Other than that, I like the idea.

 

[Hoovtrain]

The expiring contracts make this a slam dunk for me if porter is available

 

[burekijogurt]

I understand completely where you're coming from as I've ran through the same thought process. Hield is one of the best shooters in the game. If he's properly utilized, he's a very valuable player. If his defensive improvements are for real, this guy will be a starter for a long time. We just need a coach that knows how to utilize one of the best shooters in the NBA. If you put Hield on the Cavs in place of JR Smith, I would bet a decent amount of money that the Cavs wouldn't have been ran ragged in all those game 7s this year and they would have won game 1 of the Finals.

It's just Bamba has the best shot at being an elite Gobert type rim protector. No one else in this draft has as big of a shot at it than he does. JJJ blocks a lot of shots but he fouls twice as much as Bamba because he needs to be super aggressive to get blocks where Bamba can still get the block while only playing half as aggressively due to his all time largest wingspan. I don't condone taking Bamba at 2 but I would take him in a trade scenario like you've stated because we have no clue what our other young bigs will be able to do in a couple of years. If more than one of these guys develop, they can be used as trade bait. Actual valuable trade bait and not of the acquire Shumpert and Caboclo variety.

I just think MPJ has a very low chance of becoming a #1 scorer. I think he is riskier than Trae Young and that's ignoring his back injury and just going off of his game.

If I could keep Hield and give up nearly anything else for a 10-15 pick, I'd do it in a heart beat because I could live with drafting a bust by only giving WCS/fodder and cap space for that. There's still a lot of good players to be had in that range that could fill a need for us.

regarding Buddy and just using your post as an example, there seems to be a general lack of credit on the board given to the coaching staff for Buddy's improvement both on offense and defense. I like to think that situations he was put in, the rotations he played, including being pulled after certain mistakes, contributed to the improvement we saw towards the end of season. Instead of having a coach that does not know what to do with this organically improving player that used to be only a good shooter who would frustrate you otherwise, I think (hope) we have a coach that is molding this frustrating shooter into a damn good two way player. of course, none of this would be possible if Buddy was not the hard worker that he is, but some credit surely must be given to the organization.

 

[SacTownKid]

regarding Buddy and just using your post as an example, there seems to be a general lack of credit on the board given to the coaching staff for Buddy's improvement both on offense and defense. I like to think that situations he was put in, the rotations he played, including being pulled after certain mistakes, contributed to the improvement we saw towards the end of season. Instead of having a coach that does not know what to do with this organically improving player that used to be only a good shooter who would frustrate you otherwise, I think (hope) we have a coach that is molding this frustrating shooter into a damn good two way player. of course, none of this would be possible if Buddy was not the hard worker that he is, but some credit surely must be given to the organization.

And I like to call it him not being pulled for every little mistake he made at the end and instead being able to work through them. It's amazing what happens when players don't have to look over their shoulder every other second to see which veteran is coming up behind them to clean up the mess. I think coach Joerger did a terrific job getting the players to play hard but that will only last so long without the players feeling the commitment coming from the other direction.

 

[burekijogurt]

And I like to call it him not being pulled for every little mistake he made at the end and instead being able to work through them. It's amazing what happens when players don't have to look over their shoulder every other second to see which veteran is coming up behind them to clean up the mess. I think coach Joerger did a terrific job getting the players to play hard but that will only last so long without the players feeling the commitment coming from the other direction.

I think that underestimates the value of guidance. players dont usually work their way through their shortcoming into becoming allstars just by being given time to do it. I think in the case of Buddy he needed to really understand what would give him playing time so that he could then apply his excellent work ethic towards acheiving it.

 

[SacTownKid]

I think that underestimates the value of guidance. players dont usually work their way through their shortcoming into becoming allstars just by being given time to do it. I think in the case of Buddy he needed to really understand what would give him playing time so that he could then apply his excellent work ethic towards acheiving it.

Go check back at the career arc of almost any all star and you'll see more than a few organizations and their commitment starting from day 1.

 

[burekijogurt]

I guess we disagree on the nature of Joeger's actions. You view them as lack of commitement and detrimental to Buddy's development. I view them as guidance and an effort to make Buddy a better player.

 

[SLAB]

I would do this in a nanosecond. Not because of any love for Porter (I want NONE of him at 2), but because I'll always irrationally dislike Hield because of the Boogie trade.

Also done with WCS. Get something in return soon, because the thought of giving him a big contract is almost terrifying. I think he's very likely to check out immediately after payday.

 

[Mike]

If we could come away from this year's draft with a combination like:

- Ayton / Porter
- Doncic / Porter or Bamba
- Bagley / Porter or Bamba
- JJJ / Porter or Bamba

Then that would be worth consideration if all we are giving up is Buddy and Willie.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I would do this in a nanosecond. Not because of any love for Porter (I want NONE of him at 2), but because I'll always irrationally dislike Hield because of the Boogie trade.

Also done with WCS. Get something in return soon, because the thought of giving him a big contract is almost terrifying. I think he's very likely to check out immediately after payday.

I have no shortage of things to dislike about the Boogie trade but blaming Buddy seems really shortsighted. I think he's a fine player who hopefully slots in our lineup as a rotation piece and maybe instant offense off the bench. I view him as probably the 4th best return on the trade - because without the trade there is no way we have Fox, Giles or this year's #2, all of whom I suspect to be more essential to the rebuild than Buddy will be. I realize that is a lot of luck and fortune and not everyone will view that as the true return of the trade, but I think without it we wind up with a JJ level player and a middling pick at best this year, so if you take the optimist view on the trade it is starting to look pretty good outside of the ill-will it caused all around.

I don't want to lose WCS for nothing but I am not sure he's got a long term spot on the roster so I would not mind moving him for a top 10 pick this year, solely because we get another guy at a fixed price for 4 years and I think we're looking at a complementary piece at best from either WCS or his replacement.

 

[ParniValjak]

I have no shortage of things to dislike about the Boogie trade but blaming Buddy seems really shortsighted. I think he's a fine player who hopefully slots in our lineup as a rotation piece and maybe instant offense off the bench. I view him as probably the 4th best return on the trade - because without the trade there is no way we have Fox, Giles or this year's #2, all of whom I suspect to be more essential to the rebuild than Buddy will be. I realize that is a lot of luck and fortune and not everyone will view that as the true return of the trade, but I think without it we wind up with a JJ level player and a middling pick at best this year, so if you take the optimist view on the trade it is starting to look pretty good outside of the ill-will it caused all around.

I don't want to lose WCS for nothing but I am not sure he's got a long term spot on the roster so I would not mind moving him for a top 10 pick this year, solely because we get another guy at a fixed price for 4 years and I think we're looking at a complementary piece at best from either WCS or his replacement.

While I agree with most of this, WCS on his own is not getting us a top 10 pick.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

While I agree with most of this, WCS on his own is not getting us a top 10 pick.

I don't think he is either. But I'm not sure we couldn't put together an attractive package without including Buddy, we'd have to take back an undesirable contract for some of our one-year guys to do it, given our current roster makeup that wouldn't be a bad thing. Otherwise we're moving those guys for a mid level pick next year at the deadline anyways.

 

[VF21]

...I don't want to lose WCS for nothing but I am not sure he's got a long term spot on the roster so I would not mind moving him for a top 10 pick this year, solely because we get another guy at a fixed price for 4 years and I think we're looking at a complementary piece at best from either WCS or his replacement.

The problem I have with this is simple: If somebody thinks WCS is good enough to give us a top 10 pick, then do we really want to get rid of him? He frustrates the hell out of me a lot of the time, but every once in a while I see the spark...the hunger...the talent. I keep thinking it's just a matter of putting the right group of players on the court at the same time. I think we have (with our #2 pick) the talent to bring out the best in WCS and some of the other kids. I'd hate to trade him away only to have him reach his full potential right after we trade him.

 

[NewArena]

Buddy isn't the type of shooter with a knack for hitting shots in big moments, that u just give up on after two years. No way. If we didn't already have the 2nd pick in the draft, then I'd understand making such a shoot for the stars type of move.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

The problem I have with this is simple: If somebody thinks WCS is good enough to give us a top 10 pick, then do we really want to get rid of him? He frustrates the hell out of me a lot of the time, but every once in a while I see the spark...the hunger...the talent. I keep thinking it's just a matter of putting the right group of players on the court at the same time. I think we have (with our #2 pick) the talent to bring out the best in WCS and some of the other kids. I'd hate to trade him away only to have him reach his full potential right after we trade him.

Like I said in my reply - I don't think he's worth a top 10 pick alone. I just think we have other assets that might be attractive to a team looking to clear space in 2019 that might be willing to also take a 1 year flier on WCS.

Also I assume in the case we'd be making the deal it's because the organization thinks the other bigs on the team including Giles make him surplus to our plans. I think only people deep inside the org know the answer on that one. In either event I'm almost certain we're going to be moving two of our big men by the trade deadline it just depends on when we can get the most value and for whom. Incidentally I'm fine entering the season and seeing what we have first. I'm not convinced we need to add a third first year player to this team.