Donovan Mitchell: Pick Him at #10?

[Blob]

The question for me with Mitchell is the same question I have of Monk - can he play PG? If Monk can't play PG more or less full time then I don't hav much interest.

If Mitchell can't play PG - at least some of the time - then I'd still have interest but not as much. As a SG he's undersized and relying on his wingspan and strength/atleticism to match up with opposing 2's. As a PG he is potentially physically dominant and able to switch on to SGs as well.

There are questions about every prospect but (1) 2.1 steals per game (23rd in NCAA) translates to the NBA (2) 80% FTs portends good shooting (3) makes his 3 pointer from 2-3 feet behind the college line (4) 40 inch vertical (5) 6'10" wingspan (6) and logged fastest 3/4 sprint in 8 years! (7) ACC First team All-Defense (8) impressive interview and most important of all (9) reminds me of Lillard.

If it comes down to Frank N (age 18.8) vs Donovan (20.7) at #10 I'd rather have Donovan who is older and far more physically and probably emotionally mature to contribute sooner.

The other variables to consider is that if we do get Fox at #5 and Bogdan signs, this discussion is moot since Fox and Bogdan and perhaps a FA will take up all the minutes at PG. Only if we draft Isaac or Tatum at #5 and we are sitting at #10 with decision to take a big (Lauri, Collins) a guard (Frank, Donovan) or trade down, does the comparison have any relevance. Of all these options I know what I would do.... Welcome to the team, Lillard 2.0

 

[ockingsfan]

There are questions about every prospect but (1) 2.1 steals per game (23rd in NCAA) translates to the NBA (2) 80% FTs portends good shooting (3) makes his 3 pointer from 2-3 feet behind the college line (4) 40 inch vertical (5) 6'10" wingspan (6) and logged fastest 3/4 sprint in 8 years! (7) ACC First team All-Defense (8) impressive interview and most important of all (9) reminds me of Lillard.

If it comes down to Frank N (age 18.8) vs Donovan (20.7) at #10 I'd rather have Donovan who is older and far more physically and probably emotionally mature to contribute sooner.

The other variables to consider is that if we do get Fox at #5 and Bogdan signs, this discussion is moot since Fox and Bogdan and perhaps a FA will take up all the minutes at PG. Only if we draft Isaac or Tatum at #5 and we are sitting at #10 with decision to take a big (Lauri, Collins) a guard (Frank, Donovan) or trade down, does the comparison have any relevance. Of all these options I know what I would do.... Welcome to the team, Lillard 2.0

I agree, Donovan's videos are very impressive.

If we don't get Fox at 5 and we draft a SF in Tatum, Jackson or Issac at 5, then Donovan would be worth a gamble at #10.

But, it would be very important for me to see him in workouts with other players to see if he could play point guard. If he is strictly a 6'3" shooting guard in a point guards body, then no thanks.

But, he does seem to be high energy and has a very impressive offensive repertoire.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Mitchell is sharp as a tack, he's extremely switched on in any interview I've seen. Great personality/confidence, he sounds like a leader.

I do really like his game but we're full up on SGs and it's a risk to think he'll be able to transition to PG. He very well might be able, I just don't know. I wouldn't be unhappy if we took him at 10 as I think his talent definitely warrants a late lottery pick.

 

[funkykingston]

I agree, Donovan's videos are very impressive.

If we don't get Fox at 5 and we draft a SF in Tatum, Jackson or Issac at 5, then Donovan would be worth a gamble at #10.

But, it would be very important for me to see him in workouts with other players to see if he could play point guard. If he is strictly a 6'3" shooting guard in a point guards body, then no thanks.

But, he does seem to be high energy and has a very impressive offensive repertoire.

Right now Mitchell hasn't shown that he isn't a tweener. As a SG he's an interesting prospect. Undersized but with strength, length and a wingspan to make up for it. He would also potentially give the Kings five SGs with Hield, Temple, Bogdanovic, and Richardson. A couple of those guys could swing to the SF spot at times but are all best suited to playing the 2.

If he can play most of his minutes at PG, even as a combo guard who lacks ideal ballhandling & playmaking I'd be very interested.

He showed a lot of growth this season after a lackluster freshman year so I'd hope he could grow into a backup PG/combo guard but if he can't I'd be okay with drafting him but not excited.

 

[Joshoua]

Right now Mitchell hasn't shown that he isn't a tweener. As a SG he's an interesting prospect. Undersized but with strength, length and a wingspan to make up for it. He would also potentially give the Kings five SGs with Hield, Temple, Bogdanovic, and Richardson. A couple of those guys could swing to the SF spot at times but are all best suited to playing the 2.

If he can play most of his minutes at PG, even as a combo guard who lacks ideal ballhandling & playmaking I'd be very interested.

He showed a lot of growth this season after a lackluster freshman year so I'd hope he could grow into a backup PG/combo guard but if he can't I'd be okay with drafting him but not excited.

To me our future at those positions will be

SG: Hield-Richardson
SF: (Donic/Bridges)- Bogdan

 

[biltalent]

As I said in the other thread, I think he can develop in a high post/triangle point guard. In such a system he doesnt have to be the guy running the show all the time as the ball moves to the post and on the wing a lot.

If Tatum is our guy at #5 and Markannen/Collins are available at #10 I like the idea of trading down with the Pistons and grab Mitchell and another asset at #12.
Is something like #12 + S. Johnson for #10 + #34 and Detroits 2020 pick back realistic?

 

[funkykingston]

To me our future at those positions will be

SG: Hield-Richardson
SF: (Donic/Bridges)- Bogdan

I don't like Bogdan at the SF spot. He's got good size for the SG position but I think he'd struggle guarding 3's.

As I said in the other thread, I think he can develop in a high post/triangle point guard. In such a system he doesnt have to be the guy running the show all the time as the ball moves to the post and on the wing a lot.

If Tatum is our guy at #5 and Markannen/Collins are available at #10 I like the idea of trading down with the Pistons and grab Mitchell and another asset at #12.
Is something like #12 + S. Johnson for #10 + #34 and Detroits 2020 pick back realistic?

The question in that situation for me is who brings the ball up? Mitchell struggles handling the ball against pressure. If Mitchell can tighten up his handle then that could be a possibility.

Personally I think that deal favors Sacramento but it really depends on what the Piston's view of Stanley Johnson is at this point.

 

[biltalent]

I don't like Bogdan at the SF spot. He's got good size for the SG position but I think he'd struggle guarding 3's.



The question in that situation for me is who brings the ball up? Mitchell struggles handling the ball against pressure. If Mitchell can tighten up his handle then that could be a possibility.

Personally I think that deal favors Sacramento but it really depends on what the Piston's view of Stanley Johnson is at this point.

I agree that it favors Sac the idea is that SVG really likes one of Markannen and Collins but who knows!

 

[ESP47]

As I said in the other thread, I think he can develop in a high post/triangle point guard. In such a system he doesnt have to be the guy running the show all the time as the ball moves to the post and on the wing a lot.

If Tatum is our guy at #5 and Markannen/Collins are available at #10 I like the idea of trading down with the Pistons and grab Mitchell and another asset at #12.
Is something like #12 + S. Johnson for #10 + #34 and Detroits 2020 pick back realistic?

We don't run that type of offense though and I'd hate to change everything around on the kids while they're still struggling with where to be in the current system. Kind of like how Alex Smith basically had a different offensive coordinator every year for his first 6 years in the NFL or so. Hard to develop when you don't have the time to master a single system.

The Pistons could possibly do that if they were in love with someone at #10 who might not be there at #12 but I'd say the odds are fairly low. With our current roster, I feel like Mitchell is more of a stash in the D League and develop kind of guy. Especially if Bogdan is coming over. If he doesn't come over, then I think the discussion changes but as of right now I'd rather use the pick on OG or someone we could use at the NBA level that can develop in the big leagues without taking minutes away from other young and talented players.

 

[dude12]

If Divac drafts a SF at 5, then drafts Mitchell at 10 with the intention of making him a PG, he should be fired. You don't take a flyer there on playing a guy out of position

 

[biltalent]

You guys crack me up. Of course Joerger runs a high post/triangle hybrid offense. And of course Divac should not be fired if he goes with a Small Forward at #5 and then takes the best guard left at #10 instead of going with another big man. What would you do at #5 if Fox is gone at and the best option is to take Tatum or Jackson? Take another big man at #10 because mock drafts have it like that?
You can't even call it a reach anymore because DX has Mitchell at #12 right now after talking to Execs at the combine. This dude is just a winner and the league knows it.

I certainly see being skeptical like Funky is. After all, Mitchell has a lot to prove to make the transition. But calling for the GM to be fired is just wrong.

And if you want to know whether using combo guards works you might just want to turn on the playoffs and see how the Celtics are again being competitive against the Cavs with combo gurds Smart, Bradley and Rozier at point guard who faced the same questions as Mitchell coming out of college Not saying that it will work but it definetly can.

 

[funkykingston]

If the top 9 are Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Smith, Monk, Isaac, Ntilikina (in whatever order) then I think Mitchell has to be in the conversation at #10 regardless of who the Kings took at #5.

Personally I'd prefer a trade up to the 6-8 range but I'm not sure Mitchell isn't BPA over guys like Collins, Markkanen, Anunoby etc.

Joerger likes a motion offense but I haven't seen him running triangle action.

 

[biltalent]

If the top 9 are Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Smith, Monk, Isaac, Ntilikina (in whatever order) then I think Mitchell has to be in the conversation at #10 regardless of who the Kings took at #5.

Personally I'd prefer a trade up to the 6-8 range but I'm not sure Mitchell isn't BPA over guys like Collins, Markkanen, Anunoby etc.

Joerger likes a motion offense but I haven't seen him running triangle action.

Yeah I'd say it's mainly a high post offense with two bigs at the elbow. However, if the ball handler goes to the side it almost automatically forms a triangle. Hence a lot of triangle elements are used, for example blind pig.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bballbreakdown/status/846792864721883136

 

[funkykingston]

Yeah I'd say it's mainly a high post offense with two bigs at the elbow. However, if the ball handler goes to the side it almost automatically forms a triangle. Hence a lot of triangle elements are used, for example blind pig.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bballbreakdown/status/846792864721883136

I think whoever diagnosed that play labeled it incorrectly. There's no big in the strong side low block, Ben and Tolliver aren't really set up right and after he passes the ball (to a big, not a wing) Galloway cuts to the weak side. You can run the triangle with a big in Papagiannis' position but then you'd want the wing in the strong side post. The Knicks often do this with Porzingis and Melo.

To me it looks like the Kings are working out of a Horns set and Papa is just set up a bit high. It's hard to really tell, that action is pretty sloppy.

 

[Kingsfan23]

If the top 9 are Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Smith, Monk, Isaac, Ntilikina (in whatever order) then I think Mitchell has to be in the conversation at #10 regardless of who the Kings took at #5.

Personally I'd prefer a trade up to the 6-8 range but I'm not sure Mitchell isn't BPA over guys like Collins, Markkanen, Anunoby etc.

Joerger likes a motion offense but I haven't seen him running triangle action.

I'd prefer a trade up or trade down in that scenario too. In the event we pick, I have no qualms taking another big if it's BPA. Lauri and Collins are good big prospects. Collins does few things wrong. The soft shooter image has overcast Markannens talent. They are part of the "consensus 11". Donovan has to match or surpass them without favor to position for me. Having too many valued big men just means dealing from a position of strength

 

[funkykingston]

I'd prefer a trade up or trade down in that scenario too. In the event we pick, I have no qualms taking another big if it's BPA. Lauri and Collins are good big prospects. Collins does few things wrong. The soft shooter image has overcast Markannens talent. They are part of the "consensus 11". Donovan has to match or surpass them without favor to position for me. Having too many valued big men just means dealing from a position of strength

In my opinion Collins does fee things exceptionally well either. He doesn't look quick enough to guard fours or strong enough to bang inside. I think he'll be big that sticks in the NBA for a long time but I don't see him as an impact player.

And being a soft shooter is what has given Markkanen the soft shooter label. He's an elite shooter and the best shooting big I've ever watched on the college level. He also is a liability on defense and regularly gets outmuscled for rebounds by much smaller guys. He also lacks a post game and doesn't offer any rim protection.

I'm not sold on Donovan Mitchell because I think it's likely that he's strictly a SG on the NBA level. I may be biased because I thought he was disappointing as a freshman but he's got good physical tools for a SG and elite tools for a PG or combo guard. I'm just not sure you can out the ball in his hands.

Bajaden suggested offering #10, #34, and Malachi Richardson to the Timberwolves for #7 and Pekovic's contract to open up cap space for them. I think capwise it would also require sending them Afflalo (who they can waive and only pay $1.5 M) but if they took that deal the Kings could potentially draft Fox and Isaac while clearing the logjam at SG. That's a dream deal for me.

And the Timberwolves get a promising backup SG behind LaVine as he returns from his torn ACL, more caproom to sign an impact vet or two role playing vets and are still in position to grab Markkanen or Collins or whoever Thibs thinks might be a good fit between Wiggins & Towns and be ready to contribute faster than Isaac.

 

[Kingsfan23]

In my opinion Collins does fee things exceptionally well either. He doesn't look quick enough to guard fours or strong enough to bang inside. I think he'll be big that sticks in the NBA for a long time but I don't see him as an impact player.

And being a soft shooter is what has given Markkanen the soft shooter label. He's an elite shooter and the best shooting big I've ever watched on the college level. He also is a liability on defense and regularly gets outmuscled for rebounds by much smaller guys. He also lacks a post game and doesn't offer any rim protection.

I'm not sold on Donovan Mitchell because I think it's likely that he's strictly a SG on the NBA level. I may be biased because I thought he was disappointing as a freshman but he's got good physical tools for a SG and elite tools for a PG or combo guard. I'm just not sure you can out the ball in his hands.

Bajaden suggested offering #10, #34, and Malachi Richardson to the Timberwolves for #7 and Pekovic's contract to open up cap space for them. I think capwise it would also require sending them Afflalo (who they can waive and only pay $1.5 M) but if they took that deal the Kings could potentially draft Fox and Isaac while clearing the logjam at SG. That's a dream deal for me.

And the Timberwolves get a promising backup SG behind LaVine as he returns from his torn ACL, more caproom to sign an impact vet or two role playing vets and are still in position to grab Markkanen or Collins or whoever Thibs thinks might be a good fit between Wiggins & Towns and be ready to contribute faster than Isaac.

Markannen has a solid motor though. I think he will compete on man D. He can put it on the floor. He's intelligent and a winner IMO and was only 19 and having solid stat impact

If bajaden's suggestion got it done I'm totally in favor, in fact I would go further in my value to trade up as I've stipulated. But yes, getting our SF/PG in the top 7 is ideal

 

[funkykingston]

Markannen has a solid motor though. I think he will compete on man D. He can put it on the floor. He's intelligent and a winner IMO and was only 19 and having solid stat impact

If bajaden's suggestion got it done I'm totally in favor, in fact I would go further in my value to trade up as I've stipulated. But yes, getting our SF/PG in the top 7 is ideal

During the tourney he looked to have heavy legs which concerned me in terms of trying to defend on the NBA level. But he is a hard worker.

And I like that he attacks closeouts for pull-ups or drives to the rim and that he's already very good at running off screens. He if the Kings take Fox or Smith at 5 I think Markkanen is a good compliment as a good kick out target on drives. If the Kings take Tatum or Isaac at 5 I'd be really unhappy with Markkanen at 10.

 

[Ozymandias]

Mitchell is the closest thing to Marcus Smart in this draft. #10 would be a reach IMO tho.

 

[ESP47]

I think people just got a little excited over Boston taking a game from Cleveland with a combo guard leading them. I'd love to have a Marcus Smart type player, even with all his drawbacks, but not at 10 in this draft. The Celtics have quite a few solid passers to make up the difference with IT out. The Kings don't have that luxury right now. I'm all for building the defense up but it's not going to work if you don't have a floor general.

 

[kingsboi]

Mitchell is the closest thing to Marcus Smart in this draft. #10 would be a reach IMO tho.

a reach? Marcus Smart was a 6th overall draft pick. It's not a reach if the team that drafts the player has the tools and skill set the team seeks and feels as if they can develop the drafted player.

 

[Kingsfan23]

a reach? Marcus Smart was a 6th overall draft pick. It's not a reach if the team that drafts the player has the tools and skill set the team seeks and feels as if they can develop the drafted player.

That's not a starter, it's a niche player. At 10 in a deep draft I want a surefire positive starter

 

[Ozymandias]

a reach? Marcus Smart was a 6th overall draft pick. It's not a reach if the team that drafts the player has the tools and skill set the team seeks and feels as if they can develop the drafted player.

He's got fantastic tools and demeanor/indomitable will, the Smart comment was a compliment. I like him and have followed him for some time.

#10 just seems like a reach IMO, I question his upside, I think he's closer to his peak than most of these other lotto guys.. This is a legendary crop of PG's and looking thru that lens, IMO, he's more of a consolation prize.. I don't think he holds up vs the top PG's in next years draft Duval or Sexton tbh. Just my 2 cents, could be wrong, these types of projections aren't easy. I have him pegged much closer to 20 than 10 though.

 

[Ozymandias]

I think he's a combo guard and plenty capable of running point btw. DX's listing of him as a SG is absurd to me. Doesn't make sense, the team that selects him as high as they have him listed isn't taking him to solely play PG.

 

[Ozymandias]

solely to play SG**

 

[funkykingston]

I think he's a combo guard and plenty capable of running point btw. DX's listing of him as a SG is absurd to me. Doesn't make sense, the team that selects him as high as they have him listed isn't taking him to solely play SG.

I don't know. He makes a lot of mistakes in transition and doesn't handle the ball well under pressure. He's got some vision but he doesn't seem like a natural playmaker to me.

COULD he learn to play PG for stretches? Yeah, I think maybe he could, but I wouldn't bet any real money on it.

 

[kingsboi]

That's not a starter, it's a niche player. At 10 in a deep draft I want a surefire positive starter

just because the draft is deep, doesn't necessarily mean it's deep in the lottery. For all we know, not all the top 10 lottery picks will pan out as expected and there will be ones drafted in the teens and late in the first round that are better players. It's about the organization as a whole doing their homework and coming together collectively to decide what player best fits their vision, culture and does that player have the ability to reach his potential.

 

[upinsmoke]

If we take Isaac at #5 and Mitchell at #10 with the intention of playing him on the ball I would be good with it. Actually there's a number of combinations I like. Fox/OG, Isaac/Ntilikina for starters.

 

[Blob]

Point guard is his natural position,’’ Rick Pitino told The Post about Donovan Mitchell. “But because of Quentin Snider, who’s been around a while as a veteran, I played [Donovan] at the two-guard spot. I see him strictly as a one.”

Pitino: “I haven’t seen a guy improve his jump shot more than him in my 40 years of coaching. He’s got great arc. He improved it more than any player I’ve coached outside of Billy Donovan.”

Pitino: “He’s understands everything about the game — a basketball junkie,’’ Pitino said. “He has a high basketball IQ, a high IQ period.’’

Any questions?

 

[Chupacabra]

If i were to choose Mitchell it would be because I have a large, agile pg or because I expect someone else to handle the duties of distributing or because I have a really good system that gets the team lots of open shots. As the kings are in need of a primary ball handler at the pg spot I would be pretty hesitant to take Mitchell unless I already selected Fox.