Following Potential *2020* Draftees

I wouldn't be surprised if Stewart went in the bottom of the first rd. Not sure what you were looking at when you came up with him being ground bound. Stewart is a good athlete with a terrific motor. His post defense was one of the best in the Pac 12. He averaged over two blocked shots a game and he's as strong as an ox. I watched the Raptors overwhelm the Net's last night with layup after layup. The Nets could used someone like Stewart to protect the rim besides Allen.

Big men like Stewart might not be the focus of a teams offense anymore, but there's still a place for them. Now if you can get a defensive big that can contribute to your offense as well, then I would take him over Stewart. That's why if I had another low 1st rd pick I'd likely take Jalen Smith, who is a little taller, shot just a tick under 37% from the three, grabbed 10.5 boards, and blocked 2.4 shots a game.
I wouldn't say he's as ground bound as Cousins but he's ground bound in a sense that he doesn't seem like he has nearly the spacial coverage as the majority of the interior defenders that lock down the paint in the NBA.

He makes a lot of college players look silly with some of his better defensive plays but I try to view those plays with a "how would that situation turn out if it was an NBA player going at him?" lens. I just don't see him routinely making the same types of plays in the NBA. Guys aren't going to try and muscle through him, they'll just muscle around him and over him. Will he come in and be a better defender than Giles and Bagley? I'd put my money on that. Will he be as good as Holmes? Maybe in a few years. I think Holmes would be his absolute ceiling.

Which leads to the conundrum of if his ceiling is that of Holmes (my opinion of course), then what's the point in picking him? Every pick the Kings make in the first round needs to be of the mindset to improve the team and not to hold pat. If we're just replacing more expensive players with players who are similar, then the team never gets better and just continues to spin it's wheels.

Not to mention that big men are kind of the running backs of the NBA these days. You can actually find a lot of serviceable big men out there for cheap in free agency. That's one of the main reasons why I wouldn't pick another big man. It's sharp shooting wings and play makers that are more rare and much more expensive. We would be better off searching for those types in the draft.
 
I'm surprised you're so high on Isaiah Stewart. He looks like exactly the type of player that has fallen out of favor in the NBA these days. I don't even think I'd select him at 35 unless a handful of other players already got selected. I just don't see what his main strength is that would keep him on the floor in the NBA. If he was as athletic and defended like Robert Williams then I could see it but he's too ground bound for that. Post scoring and being an immovable object in the paint aren't really what wins basketball games these days. It used to be and I wish they'd change the rules so we could get back to more of that but sadly it's not how the game is played anymore. I think if you select him you're going to be looking at kind of a rich man's version of Caleb Swanigan.
Stewart is young and has shown touch on his shot, usually that's reason enough to push someone like him into the lotto. Size, position, skill, defense, and length hasn't fallen out of favor at all. He's not a great leaper but his lateral mobility is fine. Also, don't underrate physicality and force. In screening and taking contact that's a major advantage if you can do it. Caleb Swanigan is nothing like Stewart. Physically they aren't at all alike. Both are maybe the same height and maybe weight but c'mon, seriously? Not to disrespect Caleb who has worked really hard on his body but, you know. haha Their physical makeup matters and Stewart is built like the Hulk. Caleb was more skill oriented and never showed the defensive abilities Stewart has. Robert Williams is a different type of player. A Stewart might not be as athletic but that athleticism won't stop Stewart from hanging him upside down by his feet while proceeding to take his lunch money. haha. Also with Zion being the new face I do think the tides of the NBA will change and a new era of alpha ball could be on the horizon. This draft won't save the Kings franchise so why not go for need, potential, and a safeguard to possible league changes?
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't say he's as ground bound as Cousins but he's ground bound in a sense that he doesn't seem like he has nearly the spacial coverage as the majority of the interior defenders that lock down the paint in the NBA.

He makes a lot of college players look silly with some of his better defensive plays but I try to view those plays with a "how would that situation turn out if it was an NBA player going at him?" lens. I just don't see him routinely making the same types of plays in the NBA. Guys aren't going to try and muscle through him, they'll just muscle around him and over him. Will he come in and be a better defender than Giles and Bagley? I'd put my money on that. Will he be as good as Holmes? Maybe in a few years. I think Holmes would be his absolute ceiling.

Which leads to the conundrum of if his ceiling is that of Holmes (my opinion of course), then what's the point in picking him? Every pick the Kings make in the first round needs to be of the mindset to improve the team and not to hold pat. If we're just replacing more expensive players with players who are similar, then the team never gets better and just continues to spin it's wheels.

Not to mention that big men are kind of the running backs of the NBA these days. You can actually find a lot of serviceable big men out there for cheap in free agency. That's one of the main reasons why I wouldn't pick another big man. It's sharp shooting wings and play makers that are more rare and much more expensive. We would be better off searching for those types in the draft.
Who locks down the paint in the NBA? If in a draft like this you come out with a physical big who is as good defensively as Holmes but has a post game and touch on his shot out to the 3, I'm taking that. Bol Bol and Naz Reid types have slipped the last few years. I mean look at some of the total garbage that got drafted over Naz. I'd already take Naz in the lotto or near it easily in a re-draft. I'm seeing similar miscalculations in this draft prior to and around the Kings pick according to most mocks.
 
Who locks down the paint in the NBA? If in a draft like this you come out with a physical big who is as good defensively as Holmes but has a post game and touch on his shot out to the 3, I'm taking that. Bol Bol and Naz Reid types have slipped the last few years. I mean look at some of the total garbage that got drafted over Naz. I'd already take Naz in the lotto or near it easily in a re-draft. I'm seeing similar miscalculations in this draft prior to and around the Kings pick according to most mocks.
I don't know what to tell you other than the probable "I told you so" in a couple years if the Kings take him. He's as outdated as it gets with skills that aren't going to be applicable to winning basketball in 2021 and beyond.

The game isn't being won by big men anymore and the big men that do make an impact on the game are light years better than Stewart and much more physically and/or athletically gifted. What Isaiah Stewart type players are in the league right now striking fear in the opposition?

If you think his ceiling is Richaun Holmes then there is literally no point in drafting a guy with a lottery pick who might be Richaun Holmes when you already have Richaun Holmes. All you're doing is saving a few million dollars a year while you pray that this guy ever even gets to be as good as Richaun. The chances of that alone are slim.

The Kings need to get better. Not tread water. If they make picks with the intention of just "not getting worse", then all they're going to do is pick 12th every year. And every year people will be on here saying there isn't enough talent at 12 so the Kings just need to make the "safe" pick. Rinse and repeat themselves to another decade of mediocrity.
 
I don't know what to tell you other than the probable "I told you so" in a couple years if the Kings take him. He's as outdated as it gets with skills that aren't going to be applicable to winning basketball in 2021 and beyond.

The game isn't being won by big men anymore and the big men that do make an impact on the game are light years better than Stewart and much more physically and/or athletically gifted. What Isaiah Stewart type players are in the league right now striking fear in the opposition?

If you think his ceiling is Richaun Holmes then there is literally no point in drafting a guy with a lottery pick who might be Richaun Holmes when you already have Richaun Holmes. All you're doing is saving a few million dollars a year while you pray that this guy ever even gets to be as good as Richaun. The chances of that alone are slim.

The Kings need to get better. Not tread water. If they make picks with the intention of just "not getting worse", then all they're going to do is pick 12th every year. And every year people will be on here saying there isn't enough talent at 12 so the Kings just need to make the "safe" pick. Rinse and repeat themselves to another decade of mediocrity.
Well if the Kings take him that "I told you so" might be guaranteed with the way they've misused and developed players haha. Again, who in this draft is striking fear in anyone anyway? Just like picks and their respective numbers in a draft, it all comes down to who is actually represented by that number. One draft it could be LeBron James, the next, Anthony Bennett. It's all relative. Derrick Favors has carved himself out a nice little role and he could be a similar player although Stewart has better touch on his shot at the same age.

And as far as Holmes, they are totally different players. Holmes is more of a pick and roll athlete and not a true rim protector who uses his body to take up space. He uses his verticality and athletic skills to attack shots. Also, Stewart at 20 years old has more post game than Holmes has or will likely ever have, not to mention his strength. These mocks are a bit whack to me. There are solid players at 12 but the league is littered with undrafted or late picks outperforming and getting roles over highly drafted players and that makes the onus on not busting a late lotto pick in a draft like this insignificant. I see a Jaden McDaniels going late 1st in mocks and it's no wonder why non-concensus drafts see so many better players picked late. I think teams get timid for no reason.

Check this out. Somebody actually posted highlights of the USC/Washington game. Watch it. Now one game isn't conclusive but I've seen Stewart consistently live up to those matchups. He was in the summit and McDonalds games for a reason. One big is ranked top 5, the other isn't. Go in with as little preconceived notions as possible and you tell me who looks like the top 5 according to what you see in that matchup. Pay attention to the 2nd half in particular.

 
Well if the Kings take him that "I told you so" might be guaranteed with the way they've misused and developed players haha. Again, who in this draft is striking fear in anyone anyway? Just like picks and their respective numbers in a draft, it all comes down to who is actually represented by that number. One draft it could be LeBron James, the next, Anthony Bennett. It's all relative. Derrick Favors has carved himself out a nice little role and he could be a similar player although Stewart has better touch on his shot at the same age.

And as far as Holmes, they are totally different players. Holmes is more of a pick and roll athlete and not a true rim protector who uses his body to take up space. He uses his verticality and athletic skills to attack shots. Also, Stewart at 20 years old has more post game than Holmes has or will likely ever have, not to mention his strength. These mocks are a bit whack to me. There are solid players at 12 but the league is littered with undrafted or late picks outperforming and getting roles over highly drafted players and that makes the onus on not busting a late lotto pick in a draft like this insignificant. I see a Jaden McDaniels going late 1st in mocks and it's no wonder why non-concensus drafts see so many better players picked late. I think teams get timid for no reason.

Check this out. Somebody actually posted highlights of the USC/Washington game. Watch it. Now one game isn't conclusive but I've seen Stewart consistently live up to those matchups. He was in the summit and McDonalds games for a reason. One big is ranked top 5, the other isn't. Go in with as little preconceived notions as possible and you tell me who looks like the top 5 according to what you see in that matchup. Pay attention to the 2nd half in particular.

I get that it's a weak draft but I don't care if it was considered the weakest draft of all time...I still wouldn't draft Stewart at 12. This has nothing to do with mock drafts either. There are just so many players in this draft that have higher ceilings than Stewart.

He's a really good college player. He dominated Okongwu in that matchup (he's mocked as one of the top picks and I think that's a mistake as well). But we've got to look at his skills and see what translates to the NBA. His a very good post defender and he has good post moves. Those are out of date skills in the NBA. They're more important in college because players can't shoot as well. In the NBA, players are hardly scoring in the post anymore because it's not an efficient way to score. So that makes his offense inefficient and it makes his best defensive skill unimportant. If he was an Embiid type talent then I'd be all for it but he's not even close. He's a good defender when he's packed in the paint but he's not even close to Holmes' level when he has to defend in space. Favors is a good example of his ceiling but Favors has fallen out of Favor with the current structure of the NBA ;)

We can see clearly in front of our eyes what's winning in the playoffs. Outside shooting, driving and kicking and the ability to get to the line. There are very few variables with the exceptions of Jokic and AD.....maybe Adebayo at a much lower level at the moment. Playoff games aren't being won with post moves and post defense. So why draft a guy who is good at things that clearly aren't winning basketball games? Lets draft someone who has the potential to shoot, drive and kick and get to the line....or at least some combination of these things. Maybe we wind up with a Levert, Gilgeous-Alexander, Brogdon or Ingles type player? That's a heck of a lot more valuable than winding up with a Favors, Poetl, Tristan Thompson, Noel or Dieng type player. The latter types are available nearly every year in FA but the former isn't and that's for a reason.
 
I get that it's a weak draft but I don't care if it was considered the weakest draft of all time...I still wouldn't draft Stewart at 12. This has nothing to do with mock drafts either. There are just so many players in this draft that have higher ceilings than Stewart.

He's a really good college player. He dominated Okongwu in that matchup (he's mocked as one of the top picks and I think that's a mistake as well). But we've got to look at his skills and see what translates to the NBA. His a very good post defender and he has good post moves. Those are out of date skills in the NBA. They're more important in college because players can't shoot as well. In the NBA, players are hardly scoring in the post anymore because it's not an efficient way to score. So that makes his offense inefficient and it makes his best defensive skill unimportant. If he was an Embiid type talent then I'd be all for it but he's not even close. He's a good defender when he's packed in the paint but he's not even close to Holmes' level when he has to defend in space. Favors is a good example of his ceiling but Favors has fallen out of Favor with the current structure of the NBA ;)

We can see clearly in front of our eyes what's winning in the playoffs. Outside shooting, driving and kicking and the ability to get to the line. There are very few variables with the exceptions of Jokic and AD.....maybe Adebayo at a much lower level at the moment. Playoff games aren't being won with post moves and post defense. So why draft a guy who is good at things that clearly aren't winning basketball games? Lets draft someone who has the potential to shoot, drive and kick and get to the line....or at least some combination of these things. Maybe we wind up with a Levert, Gilgeous-Alexander, Brogdon or Ingles type player? That's a heck of a lot more valuable than winding up with a Favors, Poetl, Tristan Thompson, Noel or Dieng type player. The latter types are available nearly every year in FA but the former isn't and that's for a reason.
Being an impactful big is super difficult in today's NBA. Assuming you aren't a unicorn offensive big (Porziginis, AD, BAM, KAT, Jokic, Embiid, probably Ayton soon), it's a must to be able to space the floor, defend effectively in space and provide rim protection. Even guys who provide those things like a Brook Lopez or Myles Turner still get played off the floor in key situations.

Holmes is about as good as you can hope for as a role playing big who can fit into at least some of the above categories. He's a good rim protector, excellent defending in space, provides gravity as a roll man in the PnR and works his but off when he's on the court. But even if he was likely our best player this season, there were still plenty of situations this year where his lack of ability to space created problems offensively.

It'd be a real mistake with so many solid wing types likely available where we pick to go with another big who isn't a spacer or a fit next to Bagley or Fox.
 
Being an impactful big is super difficult in today's NBA. Assuming you aren't a unicorn offensive big (Porziginis, AD, BAM, KAT, Jokic, Embiid, probably Ayton soon), it's a must to be able to space the floor, defend effectively in space and provide rim protection. Even guys who provide those things like a Brook Lopez or Myles Turner still get played off the floor in key situations.

Holmes is about as good as you can hope for as a role playing big who can fit into at least some of the above categories. He's a good rim protector, excellent defending in space, provides gravity as a roll man in the PnR and works his but off when he's on the court. But even if he was likely our best player this season, there were still plenty of situations this year where his lack of ability to space created problems offensively.

It'd be a real mistake with so many solid wing types likely available where we pick to go with another big who isn't a spacer or a fit next to Bagley or Fox.
I agree with you and honestly if we had a pick between two players at 12 that theoretically had the same ceiling where one was a potential Myles Turner and the other was a potential Caris Levert, I'd take the Levert type player every time. Because you can still win with a Holmes type big that doesn't stretch the floor but does a lot of other things right. You can't win without wings that make others on the team better.
 
I get that it's a weak draft but I don't care if it was considered the weakest draft of all time...I still wouldn't draft Stewart at 12. This has nothing to do with mock drafts either. There are just so many players in this draft that have higher ceilings than Stewart.

He's a really good college player. He dominated Okongwu in that matchup (he's mocked as one of the top picks and I think that's a mistake as well). But we've got to look at his skills and see what translates to the NBA. His a very good post defender and he has good post moves. Those are out of date skills in the NBA. They're more important in college because players can't shoot as well. In the NBA, players are hardly scoring in the post anymore because it's not an efficient way to score. So that makes his offense inefficient and it makes his best defensive skill unimportant. If he was an Embiid type talent then I'd be all for it but he's not even close. He's a good defender when he's packed in the paint but he's not even close to Holmes' level when he has to defend in space. Favors is a good example of his ceiling but Favors has fallen out of Favor with the current structure of the NBA ;)

We can see clearly in front of our eyes what's winning in the playoffs. Outside shooting, driving and kicking and the ability to get to the line. There are very few variables with the exceptions of Jokic and AD.....maybe Adebayo at a much lower level at the moment. Playoff games aren't being won with post moves and post defense. So why draft a guy who is good at things that clearly aren't winning basketball games? Lets draft someone who has the potential to shoot, drive and kick and get to the line....or at least some combination of these things. Maybe we wind up with a Levert, Gilgeous-Alexander, Brogdon or Ingles type player? That's a heck of a lot more valuable than winding up with a Favors, Poetl, Tristan Thompson, Noel or Dieng type player. The latter types are available nearly every year in FA but the former isn't and that's for a reason.
So, Embiid type talent should be there at 12 in a weaker draft and that's the bar? And I disagree, physically dominant post skills aren't outdated especially when the player does show the touch on his shot that Stewart does. He is a bit raw but the potential is there to be a bit like an Embiid light in shooting and post play. And it's easy to cherry pick bigs vs. the guards and wings that worked out for one reason or another. The truth is you are much more likely to bust on those types than a big with those intangibles. For every Ingles or Brogdon you'll find many more Justin Jacksons or Malachi Richardsons. Well, the Kings did at least. Lol. Or a Wade Baldwin. Sometimes working out literally comes down to opportunity. A physical big that is going to defend will typically stick and if they show the potential to shoot the ball I think it's more than a worthwhile gamble. If you come out with a 10 year pro like a Tristan Thompson, or a Javale McGee, or a Montrez Harrell at 12 in a weak draft, congrats, you beat the odds.
 
Last edited:
So, Embiid type talent should be there at 12 in a weaker draft and that's the bar? And I disagree, physically dominant post skills aren't outdated especially when the player does show the touch on his shot that Stewart does. He is a bit raw but the potential is there to be a bit like an Embiid light in shooting and post play. And it's easy to cherry pick bigs vs. the guards and wings that worked out for one reason or another. The truth is you are much more likely to bust on those types than a big with those intangibles. For every Ingles or Brogdon you'll find many more Justin Jacksons or Malachi Richardsons. Well, the Kings did at least. Lol. Or a Wade Baldwin. Sometimes working out literally comes down to opportunity. A physical big that is going to defend will typically stick and if they show the potential to shoot the ball I think it's more than a worthwhile gamble. If you come out with a 10 year pro like a Tristan Thompson, or a Javale McGee at 12 in a weak draft, congrats, you beat the odds.
I'm not sure what you mean by that first sentence but it def wasn't my point.

We (well technically it doesn't matter what we think, but for sake of conversation lol) should be thinking of every draft in terms of how to get the Kings into the playoffs. If we land the next Tristan Thompson at 12, is that going to get the Kings into the playoffs? I think we would both agree the answer would be no. Now it's 2021 and we're picking 10th in another weak draft. The next Mo Harkless is available at 10. Harkless is probably average value for a 10th pick. Solid vet. Now will Harkless+Thompson get the Kings into the playoffs? I think we would both agree the answer would be no unless Fox took a full step up into premier all star. 2022 hits and they select the next DeMarre Carroll at 13. Another real solid vet....yet the Kings are still looking from the outside in when it comes to playoff time.

Then you look back at those 3 drafts and we're all mad because we missed out on Holiday, Butler, Kawhi, Draymond, Middleton, Levert, Brogdon, Mitchell and so forth. Getting just one of those guys would have been more important than getting the last 3 solid veterans combined. All you needed was to land 1 out of 3 picks and you're good to go when pairing with Fox. That's what the Kings need to go after. The high ceiling players. The solid roleplayer types are almost irrelevant in the current situation because they don't improve the team enough to become a solid playoff team.

In the Kings current situation, picking the next Harkless vs. picking a player that never even gets out of the G League isn't that big of a difference. Neither player gets them to the playoffs. Only difference is the Harkless type player will have a little bit of trade value. But the difference in picking Harkless and picking Middleton is massive and franchise altering. That reasoning is why I would avoid the safe pick at all costs unless none of the players after the safe pick have much of a ceiling either. It just takes one pick to get this whole thing rolling.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Personally, I would not use the 12th pick on Stewart, but if I had a low 1st rd pick, then he would certainly be in consideration. When I look at the big men in this draft, and by big men, I mean players that can defend the post, rebound, and score in the post. In other words, I'm not talking about Obi Toppin or Precious Achiuwa. I'm referring to Isaiah Stewart, Vernon Carey Jr., Onyeka Okongwu, etc. So if I were to rank then according to the order I would draft them, this is what it would look like.

1. James Wiseman, C, 7'1"
2. Onyeka Okongwu, C/PF, 6'9"
3. Jalen Smith, C/PF, 6'10"
4. Daniel Oturu, C/PF, 6'10"
5. Isaiah Stewart, C/PF, 6'9"
6. Vernon Carey Jr., C, 6'10"
7. Zeke Nnaji, C, 6'11"
8. Udoka Azubuike, 7'0", C
9. Derek Culver, 6'10", C

This is just my personal opinion, and I'm sure others would have them ranked differently.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by that first sentence but it def wasn't my point.

We (well technically it doesn't matter what we think, but for sake of conversation lol) should be thinking of every draft in terms of how to get the Kings into the playoffs. If we land the next Tristan Thompson at 12, is that going to get the Kings into the playoffs? I think we would both agree the answer would be no. Now it's 2021 and we're picking 10th in another weak draft. The next Mo Harkless is available at 10. Harkless is probably average value for a 10th pick. Solid vet. Now will Harkless+Thompson get the Kings into the playoffs? I think we would both agree the answer would be no unless Fox took a full step up into premier all star. 2022 hits and they select the next DeMarre Carroll at 13. Another real solid vet....yet the Kings are still looking from the outside in when it comes to playoff time.

Then you look back at those 3 drafts and we're all mad because we missed out on Holiday, Butler, Kawhi, Draymond, Middleton, Levert, Brogdon, Mitchell and so forth. Getting just one of those guys would have been more important than getting the last 3 solid veterans combined. All you needed was to land 1 out of 3 picks and you're good to go when pairing with Fox. That's what the Kings need to go after. The high ceiling players. The solid roleplayer types are almost irrelevant in the current situation because they don't improve the team enough to become a solid playoff team.

In the Kings current situation, picking the next Harkless vs. picking a player that never even gets out of the G League isn't that big of a difference. Neither player gets them to the playoffs. Only difference is the Harkless type player will have a little bit of trade value. But the difference in picking Harkless and picking Middleton is massive and franchise altering. That reasoning is why I would avoid the safe pick at all costs unless none of the players after the safe pick have much of a ceiling either. It just takes one pick to get this whole thing rolling.
You can always look back at any draft and cherry pick though and convince yourself that exception in the norm. I get what you were saying with Embiid comment, but my point is that you are comparing some things in a window so wide that it's hard to truly put it in realistic terms. The bar/expectation you're putting on Stewart in that scenario is completely disproportionate to that of a wing. Of course if an Embiid is staring at you at pick 12 you'd take him, but if there is an Embiid he likely won't be there at 12. I do however understand that many great players get drafted even beyond that, but every year it's not as if there are more than a select few people that fit that category. Percentages work against you in almost any draft over the long haul.

You're argument basically comes down to position and skill, and I understand that thought process as well, but that's also the reason why a Bol Bol goes mid 40's and a Siakam goes late in the first too. See, it works both ways. In this particular draft I like some of the big talent just in terms of individual potential than most of the Harkless/Middleton types I've seen. Stewart may end up as an outdated style of big, BUT, he's at an age that typically lends itself to development and he's shown some potential in areas that are the exact opposite of outdated. If he can shoot, you're gold. And unlike someone like Giles, he's already physically developed. Giles may very well be held back his whole career because he'll probably never have the same physical characteristics of someone like Stewart. Stewart being able to handle the center spot truly ups his value a ton IMO, it's the stuck tweener guys that have issues these days. He's likely not a tweener whereas some of these wings like Patrick Williamson or Jaden McDaniels (who is actually in my top 4/5 ATM) may very well end up tweeners. Hence one of the reasons why this is a "weak" draft. There's a bunch of PG's who are really more like combo G's too. I see Stewart at least having a guaranteed position which yes, there are still centers on every team. Even a few making it deep in to the playoffs Bucks say hi! League style trends towards particulars but size still matters. For comparison I see Stewart a bit more like a Montrez Harrell in terms of impact. Look back at that draft and I think it might just look eerily similar to this one. Where does he go on a re-draft?

https://www.nbadraft.net/actual-draft/?year-mock=2015

I also see Stewart as having higher ceiling than many players listed in the 1st round this year as well and do not consider him just a safe pick. Him being what he is does make him appear safer however that should be a positive and not take off any luster. He could bust, any player can, but his type of player rarely completely whiffs his way out of the league unless something mental or physical is going on. Or he gets drafted by the Kings, hahaha.
 
You can always look back at any draft and cherry pick though and convince yourself that exception in the norm. I get what you were saying with Embiid comment, but my point is that you are comparing some things in a window so wide that it's hard to truly put it in realistic terms. The bar/expectation you're putting on Stewart in that scenario is completely disproportionate to that of a wing. Of course if an Embiid is staring at you at pick 12 you'd take him, but if there is an Embiid he likely won't be there at 12. I do however understand that many great players get drafted even beyond that, but every year it's not as if there are more than a select few people that fit that category. Percentages work against you in almost any draft over the long haul.

You're argument basically comes down to position and skill, and I understand that thought process as well, but that's also the reason why a Bol Bol goes mid 40's and a Siakam goes late in the first too. See, it works both ways. In this particular draft I like some of the big talent just in terms of individual potential than most of the Harkless/Middleton types I've seen. Stewart may end up as an outdated style of big, BUT, he's at an age that typically lends itself to development and he's shown some potential in areas that are the exact opposite of outdated. If he can shoot, you're gold. And unlike someone like Giles, he's already physically developed. Giles may very well be held back his whole career because he'll probably never have the same physical characteristics of someone like Stewart. Stewart being able to handle the center spot truly ups his value a ton IMO, it's the stuck tweener guys that have issues these days. He's likely not a tweener whereas some of these wings like Patrick Williamson or Jaden McDaniels (who is actually in my top 4/5 ATM) may very well end up tweeners. Hence one of the reasons why this is a "weak" draft. There's a bunch of PG's who are really more like combo G's too. I see Stewart at least having a guaranteed position which yes, there are still centers on every team. Even a few making it deep in to the playoffs Bucks say hi! League style trends towards particulars but size still matters. For comparison I see Stewart a bit more like a Montrez Harrell in terms of impact. Look back at that draft and I think it might just look eerily similar to this one. Where does he go on a re-draft?

https://www.nbadraft.net/actual-draft/?year-mock=2015

I also see Stewart as having higher ceiling than many players listed in the 1st round this year as well and do not consider him just a safe pick. Him being what he is does make him appear safer however that should be a positive and not take off any luster. He could bust, any player can, but his type of player rarely completely whiffs his way out of the league unless something mental or physical is going on. Or he gets drafted by the Kings, hahaha.
Ohh ok so I didn't mean I'd be all over Embiid if he was sitting there at 12. That's a no brainer. I think what I was trying to say is I wouldn't pick a big in the lottery unless he was an Embiid type talent. Guys like Embiid, Jokic and AD. I think bigs are like running backs and shouldn't be picked in the lottery unless they are a special talent. No one had any idea Siakam would develop into the player he is and Bol Bol dropped because of his injury concerns.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Stewart because KF.com only has so much bandwidth lol.

Harrell would be a no brainer top 5 pick if you could go back and redraft but he was basically seen as a poor man's Kenneth Faried at the time. I would basically just call him a lucky pick. Usually if "motor" is used as one of the player's top skills, that means they don't have a lot of skill. Personally I think these types are late first round/2nd round picks. You wind up with way more Hicksons and Brockmans than do you Holmes and Harrells.

Other than Stewart, what players are you eyeing at 12 if the Kings stay put?
 
Ohh ok so I didn't mean I'd be all over Embiid if he was sitting there at 12. That's a no brainer. I think what I was trying to say is I wouldn't pick a big in the lottery unless he was an Embiid type talent. Guys like Embiid, Jokic and AD. I think bigs are like running backs and shouldn't be picked in the lottery unless they are a special talent. No one had any idea Siakam would develop into the player he is and Bol Bol dropped because of his injury concerns.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Stewart because KF.com only has so much bandwidth lol.

Harrell would be a no brainer top 5 pick if you could go back and redraft but he was basically seen as a poor man's Kenneth Faried at the time. I would basically just call him a lucky pick. Usually if "motor" is used as one of the player's top skills, that means they don't have a lot of skill. Personally I think these types are late first round/2nd round picks. You wind up with way more Hicksons and Brockmans than do you Holmes and Harrells.

Other than Stewart, what players are you eyeing at 12 if the Kings stay put?
Isn’t he still a faired type of guy? He’s terrible on defense.

I wouldn’t take a big at 12 unless said big is a floor spacer and can defend in the perimeter. Just go with Bagley at center and Barnes at PF, Bagley can not play PF if we plan on being a successful team
 
Isn’t he still a faired type of guy? He’s terrible on defense.

I wouldn’t take a big at 12 unless said big is a floor spacer and can defend in the perimeter. Just go with Bagley at center and Barnes at PF, Bagley can not play PF if we plan on being a successful team
Yeah but a guy that can net you an efficient 18ppg without having plays ran for him is very valuable. His offense far outweighs his defense but then again he can get away with it more on that team because of their elite defenders.
 
Yeah but a guy that can net you an efficient 18ppg without having plays ran for him is very valuable. His offense far outweighs his defense but then again he can get away with it more on that team because of their elite defenders.
Which prospect were you talking again?

I’m just against drafting any big man or anybody under 6’5. We need wing players badly, wings that are either 3 and D super athletes or elite shooters and these players have to be smart.

Start Bagley at center hope he becomes a 18-10 guy and Fox continues off his 23/7 campaign and surround these guys with wings
 
Which prospect were you talking again?

I’m just against drafting any big man or anybody under 6’5. We need wing players badly, wings that are either 3 and D super athletes or elite shooters and these players have to be smart.

Start Bagley at center hope he becomes a 18-10 guy and Fox continues off his 23/7 campaign and surround these guys with wings
Isaiah Stewart was the one we were having a discussion about.

We'll see but I think Bagley will just make the Kings worse unless he transforms in a Siakam type fashion. If all he does is post up and shoot 30% from the outside with poor defense, the Kings are in trouble.
 
Isaiah Stewart was the one we were having a discussion about.

We'll see but I think Bagley will just make the Kings worse unless he transforms in a Siakam type fashion. If all he does is post up and shoot 30% from the outside with poor defense, the Kings are in trouble.
We’re not a playoff team with Bagley starting at PF unless he starts shooting 36% from 3 on decent attempts. Just start him at center if Tucker/Bam can play center so can Bagley.
 
Ohh ok so I didn't mean I'd be all over Embiid if he was sitting there at 12. That's a no brainer. I think what I was trying to say is I wouldn't pick a big in the lottery unless he was an Embiid type talent. Guys like Embiid, Jokic and AD. I think bigs are like running backs and shouldn't be picked in the lottery unless they are a special talent. No one had any idea Siakam would develop into the player he is and Bol Bol dropped because of his injury concerns.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Stewart because KF.com only has so much bandwidth lol.

Harrell would be a no brainer top 5 pick if you could go back and redraft but he was basically seen as a poor man's Kenneth Faried at the time. I would basically just call him a lucky pick. Usually if "motor" is used as one of the player's top skills, that means they don't have a lot of skill. Personally I think these types are late first round/2nd round picks. You wind up with way more Hicksons and Brockmans than do you Holmes and Harrells.

Other than Stewart, what players are you eyeing at 12 if the Kings stay put?

Like I said, I like his Huskies teammate McDaniels a bit. He's got a bit of dog in him, scary thing is his body. If he can't fully transition to SF then it could be rough for him. But that attitude gives him a chance even if he doesn't. I like Achiuwa as well. He's got some bust potential but we haven't seen a versatile defender in that kind of physical package since Rodman. He's also got interesting handles and I think his shot could improve as well. Oturu is a very skilled inside/out big who while he's not the biggest body he doesn't shy away from contact. That means he could live at the line in the current NBA. He's definitely in that Siakam mold. Cole Anthony is interesting as a pick and roll shooting PG. He reminds me a little of Mike Bibby. Not a great fit though and I'm not sure how he'd survive in Sac as is. There are more good players but very blasé overall. Up top I think Ball, Edwards, Wiseman, Toppin, and a few others are decent but I don't think there is anyone guaranteed worth moving up for if that were even an option. This looks like a low intangibles draft. I can see a ton of players looking pretty basic if they don't get the right role. That's another reason I think intangibles in a draft like this are a major bonus. If those guys up top don't go to the right team that could put a wrap on their careers from the get go.
 
We’re not a playoff team with Bagley starting at PF unless he starts shooting 36% from 3 on decent attempts. Just start him at center if Tucker/Bam can play center so can Bagley.
I would be thinking long term if you were to pair Bagley and Stewart. Both have the potential to perfectly compliment eachother if they can become even semi-decent with their jumper. A reversable inside/out combo, one that that hits the opponent with face up speed and the other that slams the opponent with power. Defensively Stewarts specialty is holding up the paint. When players come in they meet physical resistance which allows weakside shotblockers to swoop down. Bagley has shown that type of shotblocking ability at times. This would allow Bagley to also not have to take on a bigger tougher match up for him.
 
Which prospect were you talking again?

I’m just against drafting any big man or anybody under 6’5. We need wing players badly, wings that are either 3 and D super athletes or elite shooters and these players have to be smart.

Start Bagley at center hope he becomes a 18-10 guy and Fox continues off his 23/7 campaign and surround these guys with wings
Well, then you're in for disappointment because this draft doesn't have much fitting that bill. There are a ton of SG's that maybe could steal minutes at SF or combo G's. The SF's in this draft are likely of a tweener variety. The only one that I think has potential that could work is McDaniels. Maybe Vassell and Okoro but they have serious flaws in their games. Vassell reminds a bit of Mikal Bridges. I think he'll be a good player overall. Other than that there ain't a whole lot of options.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by that first sentence but it def wasn't my point.

We (well technically it doesn't matter what we think, but for sake of conversation lol) should be thinking of every draft in terms of how to get the Kings into the playoffs. If we land the next Tristan Thompson at 12, is that going to get the Kings into the playoffs? I think we would both agree the answer would be no. Now it's 2021 and we're picking 10th in another weak draft. The next Mo Harkless is available at 10. Harkless is probably average value for a 10th pick. Solid vet. Now will Harkless+Thompson get the Kings into the playoffs? I think we would both agree the answer would be no unless Fox took a full step up into premier all star. 2022 hits and they select the next DeMarre Carroll at 13. Another real solid vet....yet the Kings are still looking from the outside in when it comes to playoff time.

Then you look back at those 3 drafts and we're all mad because we missed out on Holiday, Butler, Kawhi, Draymond, Middleton, Levert, Brogdon, Mitchell and so forth. Getting just one of those guys would have been more important than getting the last 3 solid veterans combined. All you needed was to land 1 out of 3 picks and you're good to go when pairing with Fox. That's what the Kings need to go after. The high ceiling players. The solid roleplayer types are almost irrelevant in the current situation because they don't improve the team enough to become a solid playoff team.

In the Kings current situation, picking the next Harkless vs. picking a player that never even gets out of the G League isn't that big of a difference. Neither player gets them to the playoffs. Only difference is the Harkless type player will have a little bit of trade value. But the difference in picking Harkless and picking Middleton is massive and franchise altering. That reasoning is why I would avoid the safe pick at all costs unless none of the players after the safe pick have much of a ceiling either. It just takes one pick to get this whole thing rolling.
None of the guys you mentioned were considered high-ceiling players before they were drafted. Actually they were all considered to be solid role player types which is why so many teams (including us) missed on them. I don't disagree with your methodology here but it's not always clear who is going to be a star and a lot of that is because star players have a nack for carving out their own niche which didn't exist before they claimed it. You're probably not going to find the next Kawhi by looking for players who remind you of him, for instance. The next superstar two-way wing is going to be completely different except for one key similarity: they will keep getting better while everyone else plateaus. That's what you're looking for and I think you're handicapping yourself if you think play style and physical talent are the primary criteria.
 
Like I said, I like his Huskies teammate McDaniels a bit. He's got a bit of dog in him, scary thing is his body. If he can't fully transition to SF then it could be rough for him. But that attitude gives him a chance even if he doesn't. I like Achiuwa as well. He's got some bust potential but we haven't seen a versatile defender in that kind of physical package since Rodman. He's also got interesting handles and I think his shot could improve as well. Oturu is a very skilled inside/out big who while he's not the biggest body he doesn't shy away from contact. That means he could live at the line in the current NBA. He's definitely in that Siakam mold. Cole Anthony is interesting as a pick and roll shooting PG. He reminds me a little of Mike Bibby. Not a great fit though and I'm not sure how he'd survive in Sac as is. There are more good players but very blasé overall. Up top I think Ball, Edwards, Wiseman, Toppin, and a few others are decent but I don't think there is anyone guaranteed worth moving up for if that were even an option. This looks like a low intangibles draft. I can see a ton of players looking pretty basic if they don't get the right role. That's another reason I think intangibles in a draft like this are a major bonus. If those guys up top don't go to the right team that could put a wrap on their careers from the get go.
What do you think about Deni Avdija and Killian Hayes? I think they have the ability to become impact players but I don't know if the odds of them reaching their ceilings is very high. Probably higher for Hayes over Avdija just because he seems more consistent.

None of the guys you mentioned were considered high-ceiling players before they were drafted. Actually they were all considered to be solid role player types which is why so many teams (including us) missed on them. I don't disagree with your methodology here but it's not always clear who is going to be a star and a lot of that is because star players have a nack for carving out their own niche which didn't exist before they claimed it. You're probably not going to find the next Kawhi by looking for players who remind you of him, for instance. The next superstar two-way wing is going to be completely different except for one key similarity: they will keep getting better while everyone else plateaus. That's what you're looking for and I think you're handicapping yourself if you think play style and physical talent are the primary criteria.
Yeah of course, I'm not saying they all had an 'it" factor to them that was obvious to everyone other than the teams that passed them up in the draft. Usually if they drop in the draft and they have that "it" factor, it's due to other circumstances like injuries or attitude. But sometimes drafting is just pure luck and other times it's good scouting. I think of pure luck as the guys who develop skills out of thin air that you never knew they had. Usually there's no way to predict that. Other times there are players that show signs of being able to take the next step with those skills and you roll the dice on that happening. Jimmy Butler's college stats are a good example of a player who shows all the signs of becoming a really good two way player in the league. I don't know if he had injury concerns coming out of college but I can't understand why he dropped so far.

Scouting obviously isn't a perfect science but staying up with the times is important. I don't think selecting a big with a decent mid range shot is winning basketball in 2020. If there is a player on the board that maybe gets 2ast per game but you watch his game tape and you realize that he has a bit of a knack for driving and kicking, he just doesn't get to use it that often because of the system he's in or players he plays with....then I'm picking that player all day long unless he has a long list of other skills he needs to improve from ground zero. Other things like say two players seem like they are fairly equal 3&D type players, except one player averages 2FTA per game and the other averages 5FTA. That's a sign that the second guy has the potential to do much more with the game than just stand outside the arc and knock down shots. I'm taking that guy even if his shot is merely average while the first player has an above average shot.
 
Well, then you're in for disappointment because this draft doesn't have much fitting that bill. There are a ton of SG's that maybe could steal minutes at SF or combo G's. The SF's in this draft are likely of a tweener variety. The only one that I think has potential that could work is McDaniels. Maybe Vassell and Okoro but they have serious flaws in their games. Vassell reminds a bit of Mikal Bridges. I think he'll be a good player overall. Other than that there ain't a whole lot of options.
I think there’s a couple more that fit the SF/PF switchable defender type besides the three you mentioned.

Patrick Williams: 6’7- 6’11 wingspan, he’s explosive but his jumper is suspect I’d put him at PF but he’s switchable

Aaron Nesmith: 6’6 - 6’10 wingspan , at his size he can switch 1-3 and probably PF’s when teams go small but he’s lights out

Saddiq Bey: 6’8 - 6’11 wingspan
 
What do you think about Deni Avdija and Killian Hayes? I think they have the ability to become impact players but I don't know if the odds of them reaching their ceilings is very high. Probably higher for Hayes over Avdija just because he seems more consistent.



Yeah of course, I'm not saying they all had an 'it" factor to them that was obvious to everyone other than the teams that passed them up in the draft. Usually if they drop in the draft and they have that "it" factor, it's due to other circumstances like injuries or attitude. But sometimes drafting is just pure luck and other times it's good scouting. I think of pure luck as the guys who develop skills out of thin air that you never knew they had. Usually there's no way to predict that. Other times there are players that show signs of being able to take the next step with those skills and you roll the dice on that happening. Jimmy Butler's college stats are a good example of a player who shows all the signs of becoming a really good two way player in the league. I don't know if he had injury concerns coming out of college but I can't understand why he dropped so far.

Scouting obviously isn't a perfect science but staying up with the times is important. I don't think selecting a big with a decent mid range shot is winning basketball in 2020. If there is a player on the board that maybe gets 2ast per game but you watch his game tape and you realize that he has a bit of a knack for driving and kicking, he just doesn't get to use it that often because of the system he's in or players he plays with....then I'm picking that player all day long unless he has a long list of other skills he needs to improve from ground zero. Other things like say two players seem like they are fairly equal 3&D type players, except one player averages 2FTA per game and the other averages 5FTA. That's a sign that the second guy has the potential to do much more with the game than just stand outside the arc and knock down shots. I'm taking that guy even if his shot is merely average while the first player has an above average shot.
They're decent but yeah, the lack of intangibles is scary and I'm not a huge fan of either for the Kings. Production spots in the NBA for most teams are largely full at their respective positions. They have to find the right team. Deni reminds me a little of a more wing version of Galinari. But he could be another Hezonja if drafted to the wrong team. He really has to find the right team. Hayes is a decent combo guard. He's one of the few players that passes the eyes test. Honestly, again, listed deeper I like what I see out of Maledon more than him. Size and athletic tools can go a long way if the player is young enough. It's all a risk game and since the rewards aren't guaranteed I think intangibles are the way to go if that player also shows some refinable skills and the draft is like this one.

Pure luck factors in and injuries do to but you also have to factor in the loss potential of the asset you're taking that risk with. Like they can say Bol Bol fell because of injuries, or this, or that, but really? At 40 something in a so so draft? Yep some of us were pissed watching that do down and now we know why. That was hardly any risk at all. Vlade literally could have had all he got anyway, plus Bol Bol. Even if he ended up looking good in a suit on the bench and nothing more big whoop. I also think the Ignas trade was a mistake. You trade a big physical wing, who, yes was a bit more raw for a better shooting, more established player that lacks all of those physical intangibles. History does not look kindly on small combo G's like Kyle Guy but he was a safer pick right? He's one of those types that has to find the right role or beat the odds to become a PG. First he has to find a team willing to let that happen.

In my opinion a "weak" draft is exactly when you should take those risks. Especially if you're outside the window of top talent or there are no clear cut difference makers. I'm also not a big fan of letting college stats do the talking for you. However, you can certainly let the college scouts do the brain work for you. Colleges typically recruit the same types of players because the coach is also basically the GM. The names that float around from AAU and beyond are already very well scouted and the reports on them are largely written by the time they get to college. NBA scouting could be a breeze if they just get out of their own freaking way. I think you watch and if you know what talent looks like, it moves a certain way. It carries itself a certain way. This is a game based on physical characteristics all in relation to an orange hole 10 feet off the ground encompassed in a big rectangle. Now if everything matches up with having little question in terms of role, the player not isn't a complete moron, and there is a willingness to put in the work to develop their skills then you're on the right track. If player A is established, productive, and more of a known commodity but lacks desirable physical characteristics, and player B is has those intangibles but is more raw, maybe is dealing with injuries let your eyes help you along with the thought of "what's the worst that can happen?". Know where you stand and don't be fearful, otherwise you've just taken Justin Jackson over OG Anunoby.
 
I think there’s a couple more that fit the SF/PF switchable defender type besides the three you mentioned.

Patrick Williams: 6’7- 6’11 wingspan, he’s explosive but his jumper is suspect I’d put him at PF but he’s switchable

Aaron Nesmith: 6’6 - 6’10 wingspan , at his size he can switch 1-3 and probably PF’s when teams go small but he’s lights out

Saddiq Bey: 6’8 - 6’11 wingspan
Those players you listed have to be combined into one for them to match what you were saying though, haha. I'm not a big fan of any of them if you're thinking true wings and/or defensively. Williams looks very much like a small ball PF. He's little more Morris twins or Thad Young-ish to me. Not terrible but not that desirable either. Nesmith, I'm not a huge fan of for this team. His best qualities are still on the offensive side. He's not a great athlete either. Bey, very marginal from what I can tell but somewhat interesting. Out of the 3 I think he'd be the best fit but as a role player likely. Look at his on ball defense vs. someone like Precious Achiuwa. The footwork and foot speed differences will blind you. Offensively he has some handles but goodness he's fighting an uphill battle on attack speed. Will he be able to rumble his way to the rim like that in the NBA? He looks like a hungrier less talented Jabari Parker or a slower Harrison Barnes. Got that covered already. Yep, I think bigs is where the talent is at in that area. I still think any player coming out has to the potential to produce under the right role. It's too easy in a league making money off of statistics. Now it's about carving out a niche. I don't see any of them finding that with Sacramento as it sits and in weak drafts rolling out the red carpet for someone could be the difference between being a core piece or having an option declined. Harry Giles, say hello.
 
Last edited:

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Like I said, I like his Huskies teammate McDaniels a bit. He's got a bit of dog in him, scary thing is his body. If he can't fully transition to SF then it could be rough for him. But that attitude gives him a chance even if he doesn't. I like Achiuwa as well. He's got some bust potential but we haven't seen a versatile defender in that kind of physical package since Rodman. He's also got interesting handles and I think his shot could improve as well. Oturu is a very skilled inside/out big who while he's not the biggest body he doesn't shy away from contact. That means he could live at the line in the current NBA. He's definitely in that Siakam mold. Cole Anthony is interesting as a pick and roll shooting PG. He reminds me a little of Mike Bibby. Not a great fit though and I'm not sure how he'd survive in Sac as is. There are more good players but very blasé overall. Up top I think Ball, Edwards, Wiseman, Toppin, and a few others are decent but I don't think there is anyone guaranteed worth moving up for if that were even an option. This looks like a low intangibles draft. I can see a ton of players looking pretty basic if they don't get the right role. That's another reason I think intangibles in a draft like this are a major bonus. If those guys up top don't go to the right team that could put a wrap on their careers from the get go.
I tried to like McDaniels, but I'm sorry, there were too many times that he just floated around like his head is in the clouds. I really, really, really question his desire. It must run in the family because his brother suffered from the same affliction. He may eventually turn out to be a decent to good player, but right now, I wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. Comparing him to Achiuwa is like comparing night and day. At least when it comes to effort. Precious has a non stop motor, where I sometimes wonder if McDaniel's even has a motor. McDaniel's is more more skilled overall right now, but I'll put my money on Achiuwa.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Those players you listed have to be combined into one for them to match what you were saying though, haha. I'm not a big fan of any of them if you're thinking true wings and/or defensively. Williams looks very much like a small ball PF. He's little more Morris twins or Thad Young-ish to me. Not terrible but not that desirable either. Nesmith, I'm not a huge fan of for this team. His best qualities are still on the offensive side. He's not a great athlete either. Bey, very marginal from what I can tell but somewhat interesting. Out of the 3 I think he'd be the best fit but as a role player likely. Look at his on ball defense vs. someone like Precious Achiuwa. The footwork and foot speed differences will blind you. Offensively he has some handles but goodness he's fighting an uphill battle on attack speed. Will he be able to rumble his way to the rim like that in the NBA? He looks like a hungrier less talented Jabari Parker or a slower Harrison Barnes. Got that covered already. Yep, I think bigs is where the talent is at in that area. I still think any player coming out has to the potential to produce under the right role. It's too easy in a league making money off of statistics. Now it's about carving out a niche. I don't see any of them finding that with Sacramento as it sits and in weak drafts rolling out the red carpet for someone could be the difference between being a core piece or having an option declined. Harry Giles, say hello.
Does everyone have to be a great athlete for you to like them. Was Larry Bird a great athlete? Was Cousins? Hell, Bird wasn't even a good athlete, but he could shoot the hell out of the basketball. If Bey is not a great athlete, then what is he. He defended the best player on every dam team Villanova played. His handles are more than fine for a SF. He has great BBIQ, and he can shoot the hell out of the basketball. There have been elite athlete's that couldn't defend a rock. By the way, Bird was a terrific defender.

I know your having a love affair with Stewart, but you don't have to denigrate every other player to make your affection known. I like Stewart, but personally, there's is no way on god's earth that I would take him at 12. And if I was going to reach for a big man, it would be for either Jalen Smith, or Daniel Oturu, both of whom I think will be better NBA players than Stewart, and both of whom can already shoot the three. That's not to denigrate Stewart, who may surprise me, but based on what I saw, both Smith and Oturu are more skilled overall.

My opinions aren't based on YouTube videos. I've seen most of these players play at least 10 times, and in the case of Bey, probably 14/15 times, simply because Villanova is one of my favorite teams to watch. If a team is in the SEC, then I see them 10 or more times because I like Kentucky. And of course the ACC with Duke. Like most people, I pick out players at the beginning of the year that I think worthy of watching and set my DVR. Some surprise me, like Jalen Smith, Aaron Nesmith, Saddiq Bey, and Kira Lewis. But some disappoint me, like Anthony Edwards, Cole Anthony, and Jaden McDaniels.

I like players like Nesmith, Smith, and Bey, not because they were ranked on some mock draft, but because they impressed the hell out of me. I didn't judge how high they jumped, or how fast they ran etc., but how they played. On their results. By the way Bey is a SF and yes, he doesn't have an explosive first step, but who cares. I'm not asking my SF to drive into the lane and create for others. All I need out of him is to play solid defense, make smart passes, and take open shots. Bey is a very high BBIQ player who seldom makes mistakes. If you constantly make mistakes under Jay Wright, you won't be playing. If you don't play defense under Jay Wright, you won't be playing.

That could be said for Vassell at Florida St. as well. Another school that emphasis's defense and fundamentals. Just my humble opinion. One final note, I'm surprised that no one is touting Vernon Carey Jr. He had a very nice year at Duke and he did shoot 38.1% from the three and blocked 1.6 shots a game. He's a legit center at 6'10" and 270 Lb.s. He actually surprised me with his agility at that weight
 
They're decent but yeah, the lack of intangibles is scary and I'm not a huge fan of either for the Kings. Production spots in the NBA for most teams are largely full at their respective positions. They have to find the right team. Deni reminds me a little of a more wing version of Galinari. But he could be another Hezonja if drafted to the wrong team. He really has to find the right team. Hayes is a decent combo guard. He's one of the few players that passes the eyes test. Honestly, again, listed deeper I like what I see out of Maledon more than him. Size and athletic tools can go a long way if the player is young enough. It's all a risk game and since the rewards aren't guaranteed I think intangibles are the way to go if that player also shows some refinable skills and the draft is like this one.

Pure luck factors in and injuries do to but you also have to factor in the loss potential of the asset you're taking that risk with. Like they can say Bol Bol fell because of injuries, or this, or that, but really? At 40 something in a so so draft? Yep some of us were pissed watching that do down and now we know why. That was hardly any risk at all. Vlade literally could have had all he got anyway, plus Bol Bol. Even if he ended up looking good in a suit on the bench and nothing more big whoop. I also think the Ignas trade was a mistake. You trade a big physical wing, who, yes was a bit more raw for a better shooting, more established player that lacks all of those physical intangibles. History does not look kindly on small combo G's like Kyle Guy but he was a safer pick right? He's one of those types that has to find the right role or beat the odds to become a PG. First he has to find a team willing to let that happen.

In my opinion a "weak" draft is exactly when you should take those risks. Especially if you're outside the window of top talent or there are no clear cut difference makers. I'm also not a big fan of letting college stats do the talking for you. However, you can certainly let the college scouts do the brain work for you. Colleges typically recruit the same types of players because the coach is also basically the GM. The names that float around from AAU and beyond are already very well scouted and the reports on them are largely written by the time they get to college. NBA scouting could be a breeze if they just get out of their own freaking way. I think you watch and if you know what talent looks like, it moves a certain way. It carries itself a certain way. This is a game based on physical characteristics all in relation to an orange hole 10 feet off the ground encompassed in a big rectangle. Now if everything matches up with having little question in terms of role, the player not isn't a complete moron, and there is a willingness to put in the work to develop their skills then you're on the right track. If player A is established, productive, and more of a known commodity but lacks desirable physical characteristics, and player B is has those intangibles but is more raw, maybe is dealing with injuries let your eyes help you along with the thought of "what's the worst that can happen?". Know where you stand and don't be fearful, otherwise you've just taken Justin Jackson over OG Anunoby.
Good post. I'll have to check out more of Maledon and see what's up with him.

I don't know what Vlade was thinking with the 2nd round last year. You don't have a guy with that much upside sitting there for the taking in the 2nd round all that often. Half the people on the board are calling for him to draft this one player because they couldn't believe he was still on the board and instead of taking the no risk, no brainer move, Vlade had to start wheeling and dealing with pennies in the 2nd round. Essentially outsmarting himself again out of the obvious pick. Whiffed on two players that could potentially contribute in Bol Bol and Trent Jr. I just don't know what he was thinking half the time.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
I don't know what Vlade was thinking with the 2nd round last year. You don't have a guy with that much upside sitting there for the taking in the 2nd round all that often. Half the people on the board are calling for him to draft this one player because they couldn't believe he was still on the board and instead of taking the no risk, no brainer move, Vlade had to start wheeling and dealing with pennies in the 2nd round. Essentially outsmarting himself again out of the obvious pick. Whiffed on two players that could potentially contribute in Bol Bol and Trent Jr. I just don't know what he was thinking half the time.
But at what point was Bol Bol the "obvious" pick? Halfway through the season there were mocks that had him in the lottery. And sure, he got hurt, but why is it just us who screwed up passing on him? I mean, starting from the #14 pick, there are something like 25 picks out of 30 that clearly don't look as good as Bol right now. And we're supposed to be singled out as the idiots? I don't remember, but there's a decent chance Bol didn't work out for us. He likely only shared his medicals with select teams. At some point, you're talking about blind throws at a dartboard. I mean, maybe nobody had Justin James/Kyle Guy on their radar, hell if I know. Maybe they're available after the draft. But blow a pick on a guy with a bad knee without even having access to the medicals? Shoot, Vlade ended up getting fired anyway, but I gotta admit that's probably not a risk I would be willing to take. Was it because Vlade didn't do his due diligence? Was it because Bol's agent was deliberately steering him away from the Kings? I don't know the answer to that. The draft is a gamble, but it's hard to put your chips in on somebody who is giving you the middle finger all the while. I mean, I don't know that's the case, but I suspect it. We're not exactly a "destination". We need to work to become one again.