Following Potential *2020* Draftees
- Thread starter Ozymandias
- Start date
Who me? Clearly not and your posts somewhat contradict that in your own words. One of my top guys is Stewart who has good mobility but isn't someone I would consider a great athlete. I side more towards the potential to be great in athletics. Athleticism is a part of that, just like size, strength, physicality, etc. I'm not a fan of blank slate types that are just great athletes with the belief you can turn them into stars, although it's possible. That's why I think it's important to let trainers, scouts, and others that lived and breathed these players before you do the leg work.
Denigrate? Every player has negatives and fit is a part of that equation for me. I kind of agree with the Covington comparisons with someone like Bey. Solid player but if you recall this debate stemmed from the idea that we should select someone based largely on position and the terms 3 and D and super athlete were implied or tossed around. Bey isn't a super athlete. Not terrible but not super. I think he and many other can be good players but my point is if you can't take a chance in a draft like this when can you take it?
Also, I have seen many of these players play. Some more than others. Stewart I've paid attention to since the high school big corporate games. Smith I've seen. I'm not a huge fan. He could be a productive player, but again, so was Jason Thompson. I've already made my points about Nesmith. As it sits he's another SG. Vernon Carey is decent. Not a greath athlete but does have some mobility. As for me, no thanks, enough Duke skill bigs that looked like him and walked into the NBA through those same swinging doors. The Kings have been down that route 2 times already and I think out of the last handfuls recruited by coach K they might have the best one on the roster now as long as he can stay/get healthy.
For the record, I see solid players up and down the first round and every year there are difference makers drafted. Just because I'm not a huge fan of a player for one reason or another doesn't mean I dislike them either. In this draft it will be a game of risk if that's your intent moreso than normal because nobody tends to stand out from the pack. Heck, not even in the top 3. There's shuffling going on there as well. Therefore in a draft like this I think with where a team like Sac is sitting right now you can afford to let your eyes and yes, physical prowess weigh more heavily than normal. The Kings just signed a 3 and D style wing to a major huge long deal. They just signed a SG to a major huge lengthy deal. That also weighs in. It has to if you look at the Kings history of failed picks and how they pretty much gave them no shot by stacking experience or better fit in front of them.
Denigrate? Every player has negatives and fit is a part of that equation for me. I kind of agree with the Covington comparisons with someone like Bey. Solid player but if you recall this debate stemmed from the idea that we should select someone based largely on position and the terms 3 and D and super athlete were implied or tossed around. Bey isn't a super athlete. Not terrible but not super. I think he and many other can be good players but my point is if you can't take a chance in a draft like this when can you take it?
Also, I have seen many of these players play. Some more than others. Stewart I've paid attention to since the high school big corporate games. Smith I've seen. I'm not a huge fan. He could be a productive player, but again, so was Jason Thompson. I've already made my points about Nesmith. As it sits he's another SG. Vernon Carey is decent. Not a greath athlete but does have some mobility. As for me, no thanks, enough Duke skill bigs that looked like him and walked into the NBA through those same swinging doors. The Kings have been down that route 2 times already and I think out of the last handfuls recruited by coach K they might have the best one on the roster now as long as he can stay/get healthy.
For the record, I see solid players up and down the first round and every year there are difference makers drafted. Just because I'm not a huge fan of a player for one reason or another doesn't mean I dislike them either. In this draft it will be a game of risk if that's your intent moreso than normal because nobody tends to stand out from the pack. Heck, not even in the top 3. There's shuffling going on there as well. Therefore in a draft like this I think with where a team like Sac is sitting right now you can afford to let your eyes and yes, physical prowess weigh more heavily than normal. The Kings just signed a 3 and D style wing to a major huge long deal. They just signed a SG to a major huge lengthy deal. That also weighs in. It has to if you look at the Kings history of failed picks and how they pretty much gave them no shot by stacking experience or better fit in front of them.
Last edited:
I think it's obvious when you have more than one pick at your disposal and you take the highest one and use it on a player that was likely going undrafted anyway there is an "obvious" problem. Then take the other pick and use it on a player at the same position who you already have a Buddy Hield and Bogdan Bogdanovic at. The Kings at that point still needed size. They ended up blowing their cap on that size instead. I figure, what's the worst that can happen fits that scenario perfectly. I think we actually had that discussion during that draft as some of us were still hurting from the pain of our head slapping.
It's not necessarily passing on Bol (Even though we did trade down the exact pick he was taken at) it's been the Kings lack of interest in mining the 2nd round. Last year was the first time since Frank Mason we actually invested in developing some 2nd round talent in the last 5 years.
Thing with Bol too is the cost was so freaking low with the 40th overall pick, you don't really care if he never played a minute for you or if you were gambling on his medicals. Talent wise, he was projected as a lottery pick for most of the year. There's virtually no risk and only upside drafting a dude like that so late.
Thing with Bol too is the cost was so freaking low with the 40th overall pick, you don't really care if he never played a minute for you or if you were gambling on his medicals. Talent wise, he was projected as a lottery pick for most of the year. There's virtually no risk and only upside drafting a dude like that so late.
I specifically remember pleading with Vlade to take Bol at that pick. Was it a consensus for everyone, obviously not since either teams passed on him. But if I and many others can spot the talent and upside with such a low pick, you would think your GM should be able to as well. Vlade was an awful drafter. I hope whoever comes in next doesn't just discard out 2nds for cash and actually takes some fliers on high upside guys in the second. It's a cheap investment with with a potential high return, it makes no sense not to.
The trading of picks for cash (and yes I know more teams than the Kings do it) always concerns me. For me, it puts in questions of financial stability. If the media payed more attention to the Kings, the selling limits would probably be called the Maloof rules. Or maybe I didn't pay enough attention to other teams actions....
I thought it was obvious the second he was available when the Kings were on the board in the 2nd round. They had no first round pick and yet a first round talent drops to them and Vlade decided to get all cute. A bunch of people on here were calling for him to draft Bol Bol so it's not like it's some revisionist history I'm talking about here.
Most of your post is just speculation but if the Kings always have to draft a player that works out for them and wants to be here, then they aren't going to be picking from a very deep talent pool. Sometimes you gotta take risks and spending the 40th pick in the draft on a guy who isn't bending over backwards to give you all his information is a fairly easy risk to take since the odds of landing even a rotational player at that spot is really slim.
The Kings need to get over this whole "If they don't work out for us then we won't even consider them" garbage because that's just an easy way for players to pick and choose where they're going to go. If you can't scout a player by his college tape and need him to come in and run random drills by himself to be able to get a good read on him, then that means the scouting department is garbage. I know getting to know their personality and all that is important but skill is what wins basketball games and the Kings are constantly passing that up for a plethora of reasons that people are always trying to justify. It's no different than the whole 'We wouldn't have been able to develop him anyway" justification that people always try to use. If you get a bunch of skill on the team, they'll start winning and players will want to play here. Otherwise this carousel of mediocrity will continue.
Most of your post is just speculation but if the Kings always have to draft a player that works out for them and wants to be here, then they aren't going to be picking from a very deep talent pool. Sometimes you gotta take risks and spending the 40th pick in the draft on a guy who isn't bending over backwards to give you all his information is a fairly easy risk to take since the odds of landing even a rotational player at that spot is really slim.
The Kings need to get over this whole "If they don't work out for us then we won't even consider them" garbage because that's just an easy way for players to pick and choose where they're going to go. If you can't scout a player by his college tape and need him to come in and run random drills by himself to be able to get a good read on him, then that means the scouting department is garbage. I know getting to know their personality and all that is important but skill is what wins basketball games and the Kings are constantly passing that up for a plethora of reasons that people are always trying to justify. It's no different than the whole 'We wouldn't have been able to develop him anyway" justification that people always try to use. If you get a bunch of skill on the team, they'll start winning and players will want to play here. Otherwise this carousel of mediocrity will continue.
I think you misunderstood my question. I wasn't at all accusing revisionist history - I remember quite well that there were a lot of fans rooting for Bol to keep dropping and asking for us to take him. I'm just pointing out that something like 25 of 30 teams before us (and after us) also didn't take Bol even though at this point he looks like BPA in those slots. It could be seen as analogous to Trae Young dropping to #30. By the time our chance to draft Bol came and went, he was already in a massive freefall, one of the biggest freefalls I can remember seeing in the NBA draft. And, don't forget, he hadn't played a game in about five months due to injury.
I get what you're saying, but when a guy who is projected to go in the lottery is both available at #40 and known to be injured, and you don't have his medicals (we almost certainly didn't because we didn't have a lottery pick or even a first-rounder) then the very strong inference is that there are people out there that know something that you don't. The funny thing is if we draft him sight-unseen with all these red flags (injury we can't evaluate, freefall) and it turns out his knee is hamburger then it's the same thing - the team gets ripped by the fanbase for taking a guy who never plays a game in the NBA and they didn't even have his medicals when they wasted the pick on him, and everybody else knew he was toast.
By the time our pick came up, I figured it was at least 95% chance it was a "knee is hamburger" situation. If I'm in the dark on his medicals, there's no way I waste a pick on that.
Well, that was Vlade's rule and Vlade's gone, so perhaps you'll get your wish.
I get what you're saying, but when a guy who is projected to go in the lottery is both available at #40 and known to be injured, and you don't have his medicals (we almost certainly didn't because we didn't have a lottery pick or even a first-rounder) then the very strong inference is that there are people out there that know something that you don't. The funny thing is if we draft him sight-unseen with all these red flags (injury we can't evaluate, freefall) and it turns out his knee is hamburger then it's the same thing - the team gets ripped by the fanbase for taking a guy who never plays a game in the NBA and they didn't even have his medicals when they wasted the pick on him, and everybody else knew he was toast.
By the time our pick came up, I figured it was at least 95% chance it was a "knee is hamburger" situation. If I'm in the dark on his medicals, there's no way I waste a pick on that.
Well, that was Vlade's rule and Vlade's gone, so perhaps you'll get your wish.
I thought the whole knee thing seemed fishy as well but I still would have taken a shot on him at 40. If they had the 25th pick, I probably wouldn't have.
We've sold 2nd round picks for cash considerations, which is much more of a waste than taking a player that might be in a "knee is hamburger" situation. At least there's some sort of chance the knee wont be hamburger and the guy can get on the floor. Cash considerations has never gotten on the floor.
I get what you're saying, I just think when the stakes are low, you might as well take some chances.
We've sold 2nd round picks for cash considerations, which is much more of a waste than taking a player that might be in a "knee is hamburger" situation. At least there's some sort of chance the knee wont be hamburger and the guy can get on the floor. Cash considerations has never gotten on the floor.
I get what you're saying, I just think when the stakes are low, you might as well take some chances.
I honestly don't know where to begin. To you Nesmith is just another SG. Boy, I couldn't differ more. Never said that Bey was a super athlete, and the reason I brought up athleticism, was that a lot of your complaints about players has to do with their athleticism. I'll keep it simple, I don't see players the same way you do, and therefore, we'll probably never agree. You say you've seen many of these players play. I'm always skeptical of that because of past discussions I've had. (not with you) I've had arguments with people on this forum over the years that bordered on nonsense, but they stuck to their guns.
Some argued that James Harden wasn't a good athlete, right up until he went to the combine and posted a 40 inch vertical, and ended up being one of the best athlete's there. I had similar arguments about Blake Griffin, and wa la, once again I was right. Being right was fine and dandy, but the arguments become tiresome at times. You have no idea how much time and research I put into this. Believe me, I leave no stone un-turned, and yet, I'm still wrong at times. Why? Because players aren't robots, their human beings. Willie Cauley-Stein had all the talent in the world, but he had the wrong hard drive installed.
In bold, you stated that there were solid players up and down the first round. I agree with you, and because of that, I'm looking more for players that fit, and not the usual best player available. Why? Because it's hard to distinguish which player is the best player. For some reason, your in love with Stewart. You like his mobility and potential. So let me ask you this, why do you like him more than Jalen Smith, or Daniel Oturu? Both are better athlete's. Both are more skilled. Both are taller and longer. Both are already decent to good three pt shooters. Which is why I have both ranked ahead of Stewart. Doesn't mean they'll be better than him, but odds are, they will be. Doesn't mean I don't like him.
I'm not sure what a blank slate athlete is. Frankly I've always been about skills, and would take a less athletic highly skilled player over, a raw elite athlete. Yeah, it's always possible that the elite athlete will become a star somewhere down the road, but why doesn't look like on now. That's why I have the slogan attached to my posts. "Hard work will beat talent when talent doesn't work hard". Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on some things.
Some argued that James Harden wasn't a good athlete, right up until he went to the combine and posted a 40 inch vertical, and ended up being one of the best athlete's there. I had similar arguments about Blake Griffin, and wa la, once again I was right. Being right was fine and dandy, but the arguments become tiresome at times. You have no idea how much time and research I put into this. Believe me, I leave no stone un-turned, and yet, I'm still wrong at times. Why? Because players aren't robots, their human beings. Willie Cauley-Stein had all the talent in the world, but he had the wrong hard drive installed.
In bold, you stated that there were solid players up and down the first round. I agree with you, and because of that, I'm looking more for players that fit, and not the usual best player available. Why? Because it's hard to distinguish which player is the best player. For some reason, your in love with Stewart. You like his mobility and potential. So let me ask you this, why do you like him more than Jalen Smith, or Daniel Oturu? Both are better athlete's. Both are more skilled. Both are taller and longer. Both are already decent to good three pt shooters. Which is why I have both ranked ahead of Stewart. Doesn't mean they'll be better than him, but odds are, they will be. Doesn't mean I don't like him.
I'm not sure what a blank slate athlete is. Frankly I've always been about skills, and would take a less athletic highly skilled player over, a raw elite athlete. Yeah, it's always possible that the elite athlete will become a star somewhere down the road, but why doesn't look like on now. That's why I have the slogan attached to my posts. "Hard work will beat talent when talent doesn't work hard". Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on some things.
I think bringing in a player for a workout is helpful. Having him in your environment where you can make him a bit uncomfortable can give you insights you might not normally see. Plus having a sit down and perhaps dinner with him can tell you a bit about a players make up. However, it's not the be all end all. If your scouting dept has done it's work, there's little left to surprise you about the players ability. The scouting dept has seen him play many times and the film dept has hours of film on the player. Having him in for work out is just the cherry on top the cake.
As for as teams selling their 2nd rd picks, remember that if you draft a player with that pick, you have to provide him with either a roster spot, or one of your 2 way spots. The only other option is to pick a European player and maybe stash in in Europe for a year or two. The other option is to sell or trade the picks. It'll be easier if and when they turn the G-League into a legit minor league for the NBA. Hopefully where you can protect every player on your G-League team.
As for as teams selling their 2nd rd picks, remember that if you draft a player with that pick, you have to provide him with either a roster spot, or one of your 2 way spots. The only other option is to pick a European player and maybe stash in in Europe for a year or two. The other option is to sell or trade the picks. It'll be easier if and when they turn the G-League into a legit minor league for the NBA. Hopefully where you can protect every player on your G-League team.
Teams are actually under no obligation to sign the players they draft. Draft rights are only retained for a year except under specific circumstances (most commonly, while a player is under contract to an international pro team, the drafting NBA team holds the draft rights during the entire tenure of that player's international career - across multiple contracts - and for one year beyond that) but it's totally possible under the rules for a team to have seven second round draft picks, draft U.S. college players with all of them, and bring them into camp to fight over one roster spot. Doesn't happen often, but totally legal.
First off, I'd begin by not including words that weren't written to argue your point, I didn't say "just another SG". Opportunity is all important. If the even if Bogdan or Baze don't come back, you have Buddy Hield at that same position making 20 million or whatever. That's a hurdle for a rookie production player who is not considered to be in the top 7 of a poor draft and doesn't appear to have a ton of intangibles to make up for it. And Cauley-Stein was also drafted to a team that had Demarcus Cousins at center. They tried to convince us Willie was a 5 position player practically in order for it to make sense. While I wasn't a big fan of him either, he was drafted into a terrible situation for him. The very next year, another lotto pick on a center. Even if they had the talent it wasn't ever going to work to full effectiveness. Hence my point about a lot of the players talked about. If they were clearly transcendent forget all about fit. Some of them might end up being transcendent, but there is nothing about those 3 players that indicates that right now and fit will likely play a major role because of that.
As for Stewart, I'm not sure I like him more than Oturu in every way, they're different types of players. Stewart I like partly because I can see him fitting very well next to Bagley especially if both develop a decent jumper. I see Stewart as having the physical wherewithal to bang with the bigger bodies. Smith lacks length and physicality, again, I look at him as a hungrier Jason Thompson which I don't think will fit next to Bagley well, Oturu is more PF than C but has very good skills inside and on the perimeter. I also like how he doesn't shy away from contact and uses his body well on post ups. One of the main things is I can see Stewart persisting full time at center and not being overwhelmed by the Jokics', Lopez', KAT's, etc. of the NBA world. I could see him as a player that could allow you to create a system where Bagley isn't forced to play mostly center because both have the post skills and shooting potential to compliment eachother. Oturu I think can compliment him as well but you lack a true center with them. Smith could in some ways but I think the other two have more potential, skill, and talent.
Another reason I think fit is critical is because I doubt the Kings are expecting anyone they draft to be an instant game changer. That to me means them even getting court time is largely dependent on how they work with the other players, what position they play, and what they can do for the team now. This team doesn't have a single Isaiah Stewart on the roster. Oturu in some ways is very similar to Bagley. Smith is probably closer to some of what you're already getting out of Holmes.
As for Stewart, I'm not sure I like him more than Oturu in every way, they're different types of players. Stewart I like partly because I can see him fitting very well next to Bagley especially if both develop a decent jumper. I see Stewart as having the physical wherewithal to bang with the bigger bodies. Smith lacks length and physicality, again, I look at him as a hungrier Jason Thompson which I don't think will fit next to Bagley well, Oturu is more PF than C but has very good skills inside and on the perimeter. I also like how he doesn't shy away from contact and uses his body well on post ups. One of the main things is I can see Stewart persisting full time at center and not being overwhelmed by the Jokics', Lopez', KAT's, etc. of the NBA world. I could see him as a player that could allow you to create a system where Bagley isn't forced to play mostly center because both have the post skills and shooting potential to compliment eachother. Oturu I think can compliment him as well but you lack a true center with them. Smith could in some ways but I think the other two have more potential, skill, and talent.
Another reason I think fit is critical is because I doubt the Kings are expecting anyone they draft to be an instant game changer. That to me means them even getting court time is largely dependent on how they work with the other players, what position they play, and what they can do for the team now. This team doesn't have a single Isaiah Stewart on the roster. Oturu in some ways is very similar to Bagley. Smith is probably closer to some of what you're already getting out of Holmes.
Last edited:
12. Sacramento Kings: Saddiq Bey, SF, Villanova
https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/k...0-first-round-draft-pick-predictions-analysis
https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/k...0-first-round-draft-pick-predictions-analysis
I know I already did a write up on Tyrese Haliburton, who I said, based on what I saw this past season, was the best player in the draft. Of course that's just my opinion and many might disagree with me. I read one mock draft that had Haliburton going around the 9th pick. The writer admitted that Haliburton may be the best all around player in the draft, and other than needing more muscle on his frame, he had no glaring weaknesses. But at the end of his opinion, he stated that there was something Haliburton he didn't like, he just couldn't put his finger on what it was. Really?
Sometimes we over think these things. By the way, I read where Haliburton has gotten his weight up from 167 Lb's to 185 Lb's. Apparently he's been working out with an NBA trainer preparing for the draft. His season ended when he fell blocking a shot and broke his wrist. In regards to that, here's what his coach had to say.
"Tyrese Haliburton was smiling and jovial, per usual. That’s what Bruce Weber remembers about the night Haliburton’s season ended when he chased down Kansas State wing Xavier Sneed to block a shot and landed on his left wrist. When he got back to the locker room and untaped his wrist, it was so swollen he immediately asked to have it re-taped because he didn’t want to see it. He somehow returned to the floor and played another six minutes, but his left arm was useless. His father would have to help him shower that night. He cried as he knew his college career was over, cried again the next day inside the MRI machine and then again when he got the official news that his wrist was broken and season finished."
About the only major criticism that's been made about Haliburton, other than his weight, is his funking looking jumpshot. But, despite it looking a bit funky, he still shot 42% from the three, while shooting 50.4% overall. That said, he's far better in the catch and shoot than off the dribble. He had a great assist to turnover ratio with 6.5 assists to 2.7 turnovers. Despite his slim body, he was a very good defender averaging 2.5 steals a game. I think if he can get his weight up to 195 Lb's that criticism will go away. His Freshman year he played SG because Iowa St. had an incumbent PG, and despite playing off the ball, he still averaged just under 4 assists a game.
I know of no way the Kings can acquire Haliburton without moving up in the draft, or by acquiring another higher pick. I'm fairly confident that he won't slide down the the 12th spot. That rumored trade of Buddy to the Hawks for the 6th pick in the draft would be one way, but that's not getting back much for Buddy, unless you believe it worth it to relieve yourself of his big salary. For those that aren't aware, Atlanta is so far under the cap that they can just absorb Buddy's salary. Now if they were willing to throw Kevin Huerter into the deal then that's a different story. Not likely..
Sometimes we over think these things. By the way, I read where Haliburton has gotten his weight up from 167 Lb's to 185 Lb's. Apparently he's been working out with an NBA trainer preparing for the draft. His season ended when he fell blocking a shot and broke his wrist. In regards to that, here's what his coach had to say.
"Tyrese Haliburton was smiling and jovial, per usual. That’s what Bruce Weber remembers about the night Haliburton’s season ended when he chased down Kansas State wing Xavier Sneed to block a shot and landed on his left wrist. When he got back to the locker room and untaped his wrist, it was so swollen he immediately asked to have it re-taped because he didn’t want to see it. He somehow returned to the floor and played another six minutes, but his left arm was useless. His father would have to help him shower that night. He cried as he knew his college career was over, cried again the next day inside the MRI machine and then again when he got the official news that his wrist was broken and season finished."
About the only major criticism that's been made about Haliburton, other than his weight, is his funking looking jumpshot. But, despite it looking a bit funky, he still shot 42% from the three, while shooting 50.4% overall. That said, he's far better in the catch and shoot than off the dribble. He had a great assist to turnover ratio with 6.5 assists to 2.7 turnovers. Despite his slim body, he was a very good defender averaging 2.5 steals a game. I think if he can get his weight up to 195 Lb's that criticism will go away. His Freshman year he played SG because Iowa St. had an incumbent PG, and despite playing off the ball, he still averaged just under 4 assists a game.
I know of no way the Kings can acquire Haliburton without moving up in the draft, or by acquiring another higher pick. I'm fairly confident that he won't slide down the the 12th spot. That rumored trade of Buddy to the Hawks for the 6th pick in the draft would be one way, but that's not getting back much for Buddy, unless you believe it worth it to relieve yourself of his big salary. For those that aren't aware, Atlanta is so far under the cap that they can just absorb Buddy's salary. Now if they were willing to throw Kevin Huerter into the deal then that's a different story. Not likely..
Have been watching Poku. Dude moves like a small forward in a 7 footers body. Can drive and finish with either hand and looks like he can be a secondary initiator. Overall, a much better prospect than Dragan Bender, who was tagged as a a big with point forward skills, but I never saw those skills on tape. Poku, on the other hand, flashes those skills. The shot is flat and a bit weird, however. And the film seems to be against pedestrian athletes, so hard to gauge his true athleticism.
He’s my pick for this year’s surprise riser and someone who has the potential to be the best player from this draft. Translation: if he’s there at 12, take him.
He’s my pick for this year’s surprise riser and someone who has the potential to be the best player from this draft. Translation: if he’s there at 12, take him.
Don't know that anyone has him that high, but he could be the sleeper of the draft. You don't hear much noise about him, but he had a very good year at Stanford. The rumor was that he was going to come back to Stanford after testing the waters, but he must have gotten some good feedback. The knock on him is the same knock that's been thrown at Haliburton. He only weighs around 160 Lb's. Plus, he's only 6'2". Funny, wasn't that long ago when that height was about average for a PG.
It wouldn't surprise me to see him go near the end of the lottery, but my guess is that he'll slide down into the 20's somewhere.
It wouldn't surprise me to see him go near the end of the lottery, but my guess is that he'll slide down into the 20's somewhere.
Personally if I was looking for a PG at the top of this draft I'd take Haliburton over Ball every day and twice on Sundays.
Both are great playmakers but I think Haliburton has a much higher floor with less bust potential. Ball's chance of really becoming a star player hinge on him getting much more efficient on offense and I don't know that he will.
Both are great playmakers but I think Haliburton has a much higher floor with less bust potential. Ball's chance of really becoming a star player hinge on him getting much more efficient on offense and I don't know that he will.
Last edited:
I'm not sure who will be the two way players for the Kings next season, but I feel confident that Jefferies will either be on the parent club, or playing for someone else. Hopefully, he's playing for us. That said, there are some players that will go undrafted that look good on our G-League team. The first one is more likely to go in the 2nd rd, and I'd have no complaint with he's one of the Kings 2nd rd picks. I'm referring to Skylar May's, the 6'4" combo guard from LSU.
He can play both the guard positions he probably leans more to being a PG than a SG, but he can shoot the ball. He shot 39.4% from the three this past season averaging 4 attempts a game. He's a plus 80% free throw shooter and a tenacious defender. He averaged 1.8 steals a game. He already has an NBA body and uses it to attack the basket, getting to the line at least 5 times a game. He has good handles which enables him to weave his way to the basket. He's a good athlete, but not an elite athlete, but he does have an excellent crossover, and a quick first step.
He's a four year college player and that's the main reason he's not a low first or a high second, but also the reason he's more ready to step in and play sooner than later. I see him as a backup PG/SG who can come in and defend either position.
He can play both the guard positions he probably leans more to being a PG than a SG, but he can shoot the ball. He shot 39.4% from the three this past season averaging 4 attempts a game. He's a plus 80% free throw shooter and a tenacious defender. He averaged 1.8 steals a game. He already has an NBA body and uses it to attack the basket, getting to the line at least 5 times a game. He has good handles which enables him to weave his way to the basket. He's a good athlete, but not an elite athlete, but he does have an excellent crossover, and a quick first step.
He's a four year college player and that's the main reason he's not a low first or a high second, but also the reason he's more ready to step in and play sooner than later. I see him as a backup PG/SG who can come in and defend either position.