Espn Latest Mock Drafts Kings Taking Green

[sactownfan]

The skinny: You can bet the Kings will have Ron Artest on the block this summer after he torpedoed the season in Sacramento.

Green doesn't have Artest's athleticism but he's a heady player on both ends of the floor who should be a great facilitator in their offense.

anyway what everyone think?

 

[Venom]

Good value at the 10 spot, although I think he actually has more athleticism than Artest. Artest has good straight-line speed and pretty quick hands, but his agility and jumping ability are sub-par in today's NBA. He makes up for it with strength and physical play.

 

[Bricklayer]

Green is a Petrie type player.

He is also not nearly as good a SF as the one who just got us to a 34 win season. If that's the best we can do out of this draft, much pain lies ahead for this franchise. Think Lionel Simmons.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

so... gerald green for artest straight up? wheres teh draft pick?

 

[TheRaven]

so... gerald green for artest straight up? wheres teh draft pick?

No, they are talking about the fact that ESPN has us taking Jeff Green from Georgetown with their latest mock. PF/SF who is 6'8" and ~225lbs.

The problem with Green is that he is yet another tweener combo-forward, though he has a pretty nice all-around game and should be quick enough to play the 3. He reminds me somewhat of Boris Diaw, and on the right team he could probably end up being pretty good.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

i'd rather get wright or brewer

 

[sactownfan]

Green is a good step forward into the young promising/ enertaining team i would like to watch for the next year while we get one more lottery pick along wit the ulta superstar franchise player this club hasnt had since maybe webber at his prime. cross your fingers this player will be a PF or a C. anyway Green looks like he is balenced and could still grow alot in the starting job.

 

[Smills91]

I think Green could very well be the choice at #10 and probably the best value as well...Green is definitely a Petrieque pick and I wouldn't be overly shocked to see his name called on draft night.

 

[JB_kings]

What do you expect at #10? Not immediate help that's for sure. You just have to hope to get the best player available and hope a few years down the line he might have a Kevin Martin kind of impact. You don't draft a #10 and expect that guy to get you back into the playoffs the next year.

 

[Bricklayer]

What do you expect at #10? Not immediate help that's for sure. You just have to hope to get the best player available and hope a few years down the line he might have a Kevin Martin kind of impact. You don't draft a #10 and expect that guy to get you back into the playoffs the next year.

The question with Green isn't about "best player available"...well, let me change that a bit.

The question with Green is whether Geoff would draft him simply because he is the most fully realized player available, the furthest along, the best player TODAY, rather than taking a shot at somebody with a higher upside who may well be the better player TOMMOROW. That's the danger. When Jeff Green hits the NBA, what's his calling card going to be? What is it he's going to do/have that nobody can contend with? If the answer is "I don't know", then you are probably talking about a support player. A nice, safe, support player in a draft full of potential stars.

Geoff has always been largely passive on draft day, just take what you can get and go home. But I sincerely hope that he is trying to find some way to move up this year to get up into the next tier of candidates, and ones that play a position we don't already have well covered.

 

[sactownfan]

Moving up in this draft would be great... seeing that mem and bos might not want anything to do wit this draft anymore. both these teams are set on PF's

Boston has stuck wit Jefferson thru all this injurys and had appeared to finally break thru this season. then you have Gasol who just came out and said he wants to stay in mem now that theres gonna be a new coach.

??? who knows how this will all play out but to get in the 4th or 5th spot would be great... thanks Clips we could have had ODEN !

 

[Venom]

The question with Green isn't about "best player available"...well, let me change that a bit.

The question with Green is whether Geoff would draft him simply because he is the most fully realized player available, the furthest along, the best player TODAY, rather than taking a shot at somebody with a higher upside who may well be the better player TOMMOROW. That's the danger. When Jeff Green hits the NBA, what's his calling card going to be? What is it he's going to do/have that nobody can contend with? If the answer is "I don't know", then you are probably talking about a support player. A nice, safe, support player in a draft full of potential stars.

Geoff has always been largely passive on draft day, just take what you can get and go home. But I sincerely hope that he is trying to find some way to move up this year to get up into the next tier of candidates, and ones that play a position we don't already have well covered.

So, who would you take at #10 that is a potential "star", and how is Green's ceiling inferior to that player's? What would that player do/have that nobody can contend with? Or, how would you move up? What ammo do we have to move up in this draft? I suppose you would rather Petrie drafted like the Hawks and kept swinging for the fences?

We missed the chance this year at a potential franchise guy or superstar. Oh well. Thankfully, Petrie is still going to do his homework and draft the BPA at #10, and that guy will more than likely pan out. The only Petrie first round flameout I can think of is Olivier St. Jean. But when Petrie has a top 5 pick, where the future stars are typically taken, and blows it, your little gripe would have merit.

 

[ParniValjak]

I don't know but I would personally be a bit disappointed if we draft Green and it scares me that he is a Petrie type player.

I would rather he take a punt on someone who might take a little longer to develop but has higher potential than Green.

Ideally I would like to see us trade up into the range where we could draft one of the 3 talls (B. Wright, Horford, Yi) and still have our pick 10 but its highly unlikely.

This draft could turn out to be a bit of a fizzer for us. All of us have our hopes pinned on a potential star where we are likely to get a solid supporting player out of it.

I think if there is going to be a slider, I don't think he slides to our pick. I think Minnesota is in a good position in the draft because if there is a slider, he won't go past then and they could very well end up with a steal of the draft which would make this whole exercise even more depressing

 

[SacTownKid]

Green doesn't have Artest's athleticism!? Wha...that guy is more athletic than Ron.

 

[SacTownKid]

The question with Green isn't about "best player available"...well, let me change that a bit.

The question with Green is whether Geoff would draft him simply because he is the most fully realized player available, the furthest along, the best player TODAY, rather than taking a shot at somebody with a higher upside who may well be the better player TOMMOROW. That's the danger. When Jeff Green hits the NBA, what's his calling card going to be? What is it he's going to do/have that nobody can contend with? If the answer is "I don't know", then you are probably talking about a support player. A nice, safe, support player in a draft full of potential stars.

Geoff has always been largely passive on draft day, just take what you can get and go home. But I sincerely hope that he is trying to find some way to move up this year to get up into the next tier of candidates, and ones that play a position we don't already have well covered.

Whatever the situation calls for. The guy defines the term, "versatile". No coincidence that is exactly what Petrie has been looking for the last couple of years.

 

[Bricklayer]

Whatever the situation calls for. The guy defines the term, "versatile". No coincidence that is exactly what Petrie has been looking for the last couple of years.

Luke Walton is versatile, Boris Diaw is versatile, Hedo is versatile. Many support players are versatile. It makes them valuable...as support players. Unfortunately support players do little for you when you are coming off a 34 win season. There is nothing to support.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

No, they are talking about the fact that ESPN has us taking Jeff Green from Georgetown with their latest mock. PF/SF who is 6'8" and ~225lbs.

The problem with Green is that he is yet another tweener combo-forward, though he has a pretty nice all-around game and should be quick enough to play the 3. He reminds me somewhat of Boris Diaw, and on the right team he could probably end up being pretty good.

OIC i was thinking gerald green has some athleticism..

 

[nbrans]

I'm not a Green fan -- he can shoot ok, but he can't create his own shot, doesn't figure to be a good defender, is reasonably athletic but isn't going to make things happen on the court, and whose college highlight came when he traveled because he couldn't get his own shot. He also completely disappeared against Ohio St. in the tournament.

 

[Smills91]

I'm not a Green fan -- he can shoot ok, but he can't create his own shot, doesn't figure to be a good defender, is reasonably athletic but isn't going to make things happen on the court, and whose college highlight came when he traveled because he couldn't get his own shot. He also completely disappeared against Ohio St. in the tournament.

Green's going to be a nice player...he's a safe pick at #10...he's kinda like John Salmons in 3/4 mold in the fact that he's a jack of all trades - master of none...but he's still pretty good overall offensively.

If Green's the pick, it'll be like hitting a double...I doubt Petrie hits a home run at #10.

 

[SacTownKid]

Luke Walton is versatile, Boris Diaw is versatile, Hedo is versatile. Many support players are versatile. It makes them valuable...as support players. Unfortunately support players do little for you when you are coming off a 34 win season. There is nothing to support.

Hmmm. I could argue that most "superstar" players are exactly that because of their versatility as well.

 

[nbrans]

Green's going to be a nice player...he's a safe pick at #10...he's kinda like John Salmons in 3/4 mold in the fact that he's a jack of all trades - master of none...but he's still pretty good overall offensively.

If Green's the pick, it'll be like hitting a double...I doubt Petrie hits a home run at #10.

I never understood that Salmons comparison at all. Salmons has a skill -- he can take the ball to the hoop, which is a fairly valuable skill with the way things are called in the NBA, and he's a decent shooter from outside. Green cannot remotely take the ball to the hoop because he doesn't have any moves. He got by with his size and athleticism in college, but he's an average to good athlete by NBA standards and can't really do anything very well.

He's not a jack of all trades, he's a jack of no trades.

 

[Gary]

What's going on with Garcia?

I've got Garcia starting at SF next season. The last thing we need is another SF/SG or undersized PF type player on the team. I think Petrie has to know this. We did the same with Martin. Two years riding the pine, than starting. Plus as backups we have a developing Douby, and a vet in Salmons. If we keep Bibby that is five people at the three spots..

At PG we have Bibby, Salmons, Garcia, and Douby that can play.
At SG we have Martin, Salmons, Garcia, Bibby, and Douby that can play.
At SF we have Garcia, Martin, Salmons that can play..

All of the above depending on the lineup we are using but that is pretty dang flexible and many different combinations can be used.

Now for comparison...

PF we have KT (undersized), SAR (horrible defense, slow), Miller (Horrible defense, slow, bad feet), and Williams that can play.
C we have Miller (Slow, bad defense at C horrible for PF), SAR (undersized for C, and horrible defense at C as well as PF), and Williams (undersized, but can thrive in a small vs. small lineup).

Our flexibility at the big spots is lacking.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Green is a Boris Diaw at best. Not enough athleticism and very passive for a supposed top player in the draft. I hope he gets picked before our pick.

 

[Gary]

Luke Walton is versatile, Boris Diaw is versatile, Hedo is versatile. Many support players are versatile. It makes them valuable...as support players. Unfortunately support players do little for you when you are coming off a 34 win season. There is nothing to support.

Shoot.. If there was a way to get a draft pick for Artest (along with an expiring contract player) than I would throw KT to Orlando with that pick, and and the Expiring for Battie, and Hedo. I know Orlando is under the cap this year, but this FA season kind of sucks, and I am sure they would want some space next year as well.

Vlade4GM, Green isn't the best available at #10 anyway. There are a good 6-8 better players out there at #10 even if the top 9 are selected 1-9.

 

[Bricklayer]

Hmmm. I could argue that most "superstar" players are exactly that because of their versatility as well.

And you would be half correct.

The difference between a star and a superstar is preceisely the difference between a guy with one great skill, and a guy with one great skill and many good ones. So yes, the extra versatility is often what puts the superstars into a class all their own.

But there is no and has never been a superstar who's "great skill" was versatility. As a primary attribute that's for the roleplayers and 6th men. But superstars always have one or more all world skills, and just add in multifaceted attacks aroudn the edges. Kobe is a tremendous scorer...and he does everything else. Duncan is...well you pick it. A tremendous defender, tremendous rebounder, great post player. Meanwhile Green is not a great scorer, he's a decent college rebounder but hardly dominating, he's not great off the dribble, his range is suspect, and his post game is ok, but mostly against smaller players. He might be able to take advantage of a pronounced weakness in an opponent, but he's got virtually nothing that currently looks like he'll be able to force his will upon an opponent at the next level.

What he does well is think the game and pass, he's a pretty good finisher, and he's a solid defender. That resume screams support player. And he's older than the other SF prospects in the draft (Brewer aside, who does have the one great calling card of defense), and so likely is closer to done developing. I think he's as close to being a safe pick as you may find at #10, in that he should be a guy who will always be able to contribute in the NBA. But his chances of being a star SF at the next level are considerably below Brewer, Wright or Young IMO (not that I consider any of them locks, but they all have potential int ehir own ways).

 

[SacTownKid]

And you would be half correct.

The difference between a star and a superstar is preceisely the difference between a guy with one great skill, and a guy with one great skill and many good ones. So yes, the extra versatility is often what puts the superstars into a class all their own.

But there is no and has never been a superstar who's "great skill" was versatility. As a primary attribute that's for the roleplayers and 6th men. Kobe is a tremendous scorer...and he does everything else. Duncan is...well you pick it. A tremendous defender, tremendous rebounder, great post player. Green is not a great scorer, an decent rebounder...in college, he's not great off the dribble, his range is suspect, and his post game is ok, but mostly against smaller players. He might be able to take advantage of a pronounced weakness in an opponent, but he's got virtually nothing that currently looks like he'll be able to force his will upon an opponent at the next level.

What he does well is think the game and pass, he's a pretty good finisher, and he's a solid defender. That resume screams support player. And he's older than the other SF prospects in the draft (Brewer aside, who does have the one great calling card of defense), and so likely is closer to done developing.

You can bring up guys like Luke Walton who are indeed support players but I would think and hope that Green will be quite a few tiers above ol' Lukey boy in terms of overall impact, skill, and talent. You can't just say, "vanilla". I think Green's versatility is an asset, not a detriment or a reason why he will never be "this or that".

I do think Green and Wright have the chance to at least be a star level player. Superstar, no, but getting a star player at #10 is very unusual and a great thing. Not one to be ashamed of.

 

[Bricklayer]

You can bring up guys like Luke Walton who are indeed support players but I would think and hope that Green will be quite a few tiers above ol' Lukey boy in terms of overall impact, skill, and talent. You can't just say, "vanilla". I think Green's versatility is an asset, not a detriment or a reason why he will never be "this or that".

I do think Green and Wright have the chance to at least be a star level player. Superstar, no, but getting a star player at #10 is very unusual and a great thing. Not one to be ashamed of.

Name me the NBA star who isn't great at anything.

Unless you think that Green can somehow score 20ppg in the NBA -- and there I would REALLY like to hear your argument about how he's going to dot hat when he barely more than a support guy even in college -- what is he going to do to be a star? Marion like rebounder? No. Lock down defender? No. He's not as big, cannot handle or rebound like Odom. So how is he going to be a star? What are his numebrs going to be like? And how? I am having a hard time seeing it.

P.S. as an aside, Jeff Green is, or should be, a much better defender than Walton. But the thing that he needs to learn from Walton if he wants to be assured of being the better player is add that 3pt shot. Walton turned himself into a useful and effective roleplayer this season, and a major part of it was adding the 3pt shot so he could spot up.

 

[SacTownKid]

Name me the NBA star who isn't great at anything.

Unless you think that Green can somehow score 20ppg in the NBA -- and there I would REALLY like to hear your argument about how he's going to dot hat when he barely more than a support guy even in college -- what is he going to do to be a star? Marion like rebounder? No. Lock down defender? No. He's not as big, cannot handle or rebound like Odom. So how is he going to be a star? What are his numebrs going to be like? And how? I am having a hard time seeing it.

Look at the glass half full instead of half empty.

One of the arguments on this guy's behalf is that he played in a slow down system and if you're looking for numbers it's hard to judge him accurately in his particular college setting.

I see a player who happens to be good at everything. Star players need to be great at something because of role more than anything. I see Green as a guy that can possibly grow into being whatever you want/need him to be.

 

[Venom]

Name me the NBA star who isn't great at anything.

Unless you think that Green can somehow score 20ppg in the NBA -- and there I would REALLY like to hear your argument about how he's going to dot hat when he barely more than a support guy even in college -- what is he going to do to be a star? Marion like rebounder? No. Lock down defender? No. He's not as big, cannot handle or rebound like Odom. So how is he going to be a star? What are his numebrs going to be like? And how? I am having a hard time seeing it.

P.S. as an aside, Jeff Green is, or should be, a much better defender than Walton. But the thing that he needs to learn from Walton if he wants to be assured of being the better player is add that 3pt shot. Walton turned himself into a useful and effective roleplayer this season, and a major part of it was adding the 3pt shot so he could spot up.

Although you avoided my earlier post I'll tell you one thing that Green is great at: CHARACTER. Something we sorely lack. Or perhaps you would like to continue with Bibby, Artest, and lazy *** Miller as the face of the franchise. How about you tell me what Shane Battier is "great" at? The Rockets could have had Rudy Gay, with off the charts athleticism, and chose Shane Battier instead. Why is that?

(I know, I know. . .they already have Yao and T-Mac and we have no superstars. . .blah, blah, blah. We're not getting a superstar in this draft. There is no diamond in the rough at the 10 spot. We may as well be positive about being able replace the jack*** malcontent we currently have at SF for a high-character guy like Wright, Brewer, Green, or Young.)

 

[nbrans]

Although you avoided my earlier post I'll tell you one thing that Green is great at: CHARACTER. Something we sorely lack. Or perhaps you would like to continue with Bibby, Artest, and lazy *** Miller as the face of the franchise. How about you tell me what Shane Battier is "great" at? The Rockets could have had Rudy Gay, with off the charts athleticism, and chose Shane Battier instead. Why is that?

(I know, I know. . .they already have Yao and T-Mac and we have no superstars. . .blah, blah, blah. We're not getting a superstar in this draft. There is no diamond in the rough at the 10 spot. We may as well be positive about being able replace the jack*** malcontent we currently have at SF for a high-character guy like Wright, Brewer, Green, or Young.)

I'd rather have an ***hole who's really good.