Grade the Kings draft

What grade do you give the Kings for the draft?

  • A

    Votes: 4 5.9%
  • B

    Votes: 9 13.2%
  • C

    Votes: 29 42.6%
  • D

    Votes: 18 26.5%
  • F

    Votes: 8 11.8%

  • Total voters
    68
  • Poll closed .

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
June 24th update - I still wish we had Bol Bol.
The thing is that Bol's legs really scare me. The dude is built like a stickman and suffered a non contact foot injury (which is the sort of malady that brought an early end to Yao's career) and has a family history of ill health (Manute had early rheumatism that contributed to the many injuries that ended his career).

I realize that we drafted Harry a couple of years ago but (a) Harry was a higher rated prospect than Bol and (b) both of his knee injuries were results of contact and not a genetic issue with his knees.
 
Speaking of risk and asset management etc, this person put together a list of all the second round picks between 2001-2015 and broke them down into tiers. Out of the 447 picks, 94 of them became average role players or better (in his opinion) The rest were either low impact or never suited up. That averages out to roughly 6 second round draftees a year who will go on to be a solid role player or better.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/7v1syd
 
It is interesting, indeed

There's a small contingent that suffer from a Lavar Ball-esque delusion of grandeur wherein their perceived knowledge and abilities greatly exceed reality. Like all narcissistic personality types, it's always easier and far more preferrable to mock others for not seeing their greatness than it is to admit that it really doesn't exist.

As you were.
For many people here the argument is that based on the things we know its a reasonable presumption that the player we picked at 40 most likely would've been available at 47 or even 60. Not a 100% fact, but a reasonable presumption from the things we know.

But hey, the end result didn't jive with what the self-anointed experts would have done so the only reasonable explanation for it is that the KINGS went about it all wrong.

Makes sense, right?
Considering how awfull this franchise has been at drafting, a lot of these "self anointed experts" and average fans would've easily done better over the years. People disagreeing with the franchises decision shouldn't be this surprising. I think there was some graph posted in here during last years draft discussion where it showed past different drafts comparing the consensus pick by fans to who the franchise actually picked and the fan consensus looked a lot better.

Wrong. The point I have been trying to make is that your "asset managers" are foolish in thinking that they see the complete picture when few, if any, do. And reading up the internet doesn't give you knowledge; it gives you information - some good and some bad and some intentionally misleading. I don't put my faith in Vlade. He's completely capable of making mistakes of all proportions. But Kingsfans posters who always know and see the "facts" that support their biases are... fallible.
You disagree that its reasonable to assume Justin James would've been available later in the draft? When basically every draft expert has the guy going around undrafted territory and has zero buzz from insiders to be considered by any team, I think that means that its more likely that he would've been available later. Could be that he wouldn've but based on the things we know imo its reasonable to predict he would've been.

If we say thats a reasonable assumption and also see that we traded back in the draft and literally gained nothing but little more money to the owners. Those two things are not maximizing your assets. I think its quite reasonable thing to say and the argument behind it imo isnt anywhere near "foolish".
 
so "Team F" (for a lack of a better term) has pretty clearly defined why they hold their position:

-Don't think we played the draft board well; overpaid for James specifically.
-Wasted opportunities to use our cap space for picks: OKC was clearly shopping their pick and Warren (a good NBA player) and #32 were free
-Took older guards who even if they end up working out, almost certainly won't be better than Bogi/Buddy/Fox. Low impact upside for helping us down the line.
-Gave up 8 spots of draft spot equity for cash. Didn't improve future assets with the trade down.
-Didn't use the 7 future 2nds we have in the next 2 drafts to improve our position in this draft. Going to lead to some of these picks just being wasted because we can't fit them on the team.

Would be curious to hear"Team A-B-C" and why they graded our draft well or average.
 
so "Team F" (for a lack of a better term) has pretty clearly defined why they hold their position:

-Don't think we played the draft board well; overpaid for James specifically.
-Wasted opportunities to use our cap space for picks: OKC was clearly shopping their pick and Warren (a good NBA player) and #32 were free
-Took older guards who even if they end up working out, almost certainly won't be better than Bogi/Buddy/Fox. Low impact upside for helping us down the line.
-Gave up 8 spots of draft spot equity for cash. Didn't improve future assets with the trade down.
-Didn't use the 7 future 2nds we have in the next 2 drafts to improve our position in this draft. Going to lead to some of these picks just being wasted because we can't fit them on the team.

Would be curious to hear"Team A-B-C" and why they graded our draft well or average.
I voted "C," so I guess that puts me on Team C. Should've voted incomplete but that wasn't an option. I was disappointed that there wasn't a trade with Oklahoma but apparently they were asking for more than what was reported. I can understand some of the reported reasons given, don't know if correct reasoning but we will find out. On the other, I don't understand the angst over the picks.

So basically it came down to couldn't give it a higher grade than average and at the same time couldn't give it a lower, unless I wanted to penalize them for giving me Maloofian feelings with the cash considerations.
 
so "Team F" (for a lack of a better term) has pretty clearly defined why they hold their position:

-Don't think we played the draft board well; overpaid for James specifically.
-Wasted opportunities to use our cap space for picks: OKC was clearly shopping their pick and Warren (a good NBA player) and #32 were free
-Took older guards who even if they end up working out, almost certainly won't be better than Bogi/Buddy/Fox. Low impact upside for helping us down the line.
-Gave up 8 spots of draft spot equity for cash. Didn't improve future assets with the trade down.
-Didn't use the 7 future 2nds we have in the next 2 drafts to improve our position in this draft. Going to lead to some of these picks just being wasted because we can't fit them on the team.

Would be curious to hear"Team A-B-C" and why they graded our draft well or average.
Graded A to tweak people who take themselves too seriously and who rate a batch of lower second rounders on the youngest team in the league as some sort of important pivotal resource and moment.

Because I think it is silly to be intense about picks 40 and lower. It is like fighting over nothing.

If they had sold all 3 picks it would have been fine
 
EH. I'm done trying to talk sense to these people. I don't disparage their opinions at all. They are entitled to them just like everyone else. In some cases, I don't even really disagree.

I really only take issue with 2 tactics regarding any opinion. Making blanket statements without providing solid reasoning or factual evidence to support it and/or positioning hearsay & supposition as truth or fact. IMO, there's far too much of that going around in these draft threads.

If these people were a bit more humble in stating that 'it's their gut feeling' that A, B and C might be true because of X, Y, and Z, I could accept and take that in stride despite not agreeing with it at all. But when it's pushed and positioned as truth then defended with contempt & an aura of superiority when someone has the audacity to offer up a challenge -- that's where I find it difficult not to respond.

I really need to work on that.
Dude it’s a State your opinion and give a grade thread. Are all your disclaimers really needed in a thread asking for your opinion and why....
 
Graded A to tweak people who take themselves too seriously and who rate a batch of lower second rounders on the youngest team in the league as some sort of important pivotal resource and moment.

Because I think it is silly to be intense about picks 40 and lower. It is like fighting over nothing.

If they had sold all 3 picks it would have been fine
Who is taking themselves too seriously. It seems that would be you... ie the person who constantly criticizes other for responding to a thread about which they are supposed to provide a grade a rational merely because you don’t like they provided a negative grade.
 
I gave it a B.

Kings doubled down on the strategy—get shooters for their core, dynamic athletes.

Best part of the draft, seeing just how iron tight Vlade’s ship is. No one even knew Justin James existed n Guy only showed up on James Ham’s radar bcz he came out twice.

Additionally, reading the meltdowns on STR has been wonderful during my vacay. Speaking of STR, how long before SBN replaces the editors/writers? Theres been a few, who are completely on tilt n forgotten any semblance of objectivity.
 
Graded A to tweak people who take themselves too seriously and who rate a batch of lower second rounders on the youngest team in the league as some sort of important pivotal resource and moment.

Because I think it is silly to be intense about picks 40 and lower. It is like fighting over nothing.

If they had sold all 3 picks it would have been fine
Second rounders are definetly not worthless. I mean you have that big statistical analysis right there on how often you get a contributor with your 2nd round pick. Its probably not the best one but at least it can prove they are not worthless as you are claiming. Drafts 2001-2015 had 447 guys drafted on the 2nd round. 94 of them was/are at least very good role players and 26 of them all stars/near all stars. That means you have a 21% chance on average to get a very cheap and a very usefull player. To simply get a contributer that can be a cheap option, the odds improve to 32%. Asset like that cannot be worthless and it certainly wouldn't be okay if the team just sold them all.

Besides that 2nd rounders can be used to trade up, to trade down for more picks, to trade them to future picks if you dont have roster spots and as part of deals to trade for better players. Even if they are not your most valuable assets, they are still assets that have value and they should be treated accordingly. Arguing that it doesnt matter what a team does with their 2nd rounders is just not right.
 
Second rounders are definetly not worthless. I mean you have that big statistical analysis right there on how often you get a contributor with your 2nd round pick. Its probably not the best one but at least it can prove they are not worthless as you are claiming. Drafts 2001-2015 had 447 guys drafted on the 2nd round. 94 of them was/are at least very good role players and 26 of them all stars/near all stars. That means you have a 21% chance on average to get a very cheap and a very usefull player. To simply get a contributer that can be a cheap option, the odds improve to 32%. Asset like that cannot be worthless and it certainly wouldn't be okay if the team just sold them all.

Besides that 2nd rounders can be used to trade up, to trade down for more picks, to trade them to future picks if you dont have roster spots and as part of deals to trade for better players. Even if they are not your most valuable assets, they are still assets that have value and they should be treated accordingly. Arguing that it doesnt matter what a team does with their 2nd rounders is just not right.
If they can be sold - they can be bought. And having $1.5M with which to BUY a second rounder is as good as having a second rounder as far as I’m concerned.

I’m glad Vlade picked the guy who - based on in person workouts - impressed him.

Look, all points that need to be made have been made. I completely understand where you and STD are coming from. I don’t “fail to understand your points”. I’m glad the forum permits expression of all views.

I happen to like an out of the box “eye test” pick and I have super low regard for professional mock draft bloggers.
 
If they can be sold - they can be bought. And having $1.5M with which to BUY a second rounder is as good as having a second rounder as far as I’m concerned.

I’m glad Vlade picked the guy who - based on in person workouts - impressed him.

Look, all points that need to be made have been made. I completely understand where you and STD are coming from. I don’t “fail to understand your points”. I’m glad the forum permits expression of all views.

I happen to like an out of the box “eye test” pick and I have super low regard for professional mock draft bloggers.
Every team is allowed to use ~5mil cash in trades and to receive 5mil cash in trades annually. Us selling our pick this year doesnt have any impact on our ability to buy picks in the future. It literally is nothing but getting money to the owner aka horrible use of an asset.

I dont even have a strong opinion on Justin James as a prospect. From what I've seen, looks to be a very hit or miss prospect, relatively high ceiling and a really low floor. We'll see but it looks like he could've been available later in the draft. Maybe at the 47 if we didnt move down 9 spots without getting anything real back.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
Every team is allowed to use ~5mil cash in trades and to receive 5mil cash in trades annually. Us selling our pick this year doesnt have any impact on our ability to buy picks in the future. It literally is nothing but getting money to the owner aka horrible use of an asset.

I dont even have a strong opinion on Justin James as a prospect. From what I've seen, looks to be a very hit or miss prospect, relatively high ceiling and a really low floor. We'll see but it looks like he could've been available later in the draft. Maybe at the 47 if we didnt move down 9 spots without getting anything real back.
But still, under the assumption that we were targeting Kyle Guy with our second pick (which we pretty much telegraphed before the draft), isn't it better to get Guy at #55 AND $1M than to get Guy at #47 and $0? Could we have gotten a future second rounder to move down? Who knows? Might not have been offered. And even though the annual ledger on cash-in-trades resets, that doesn't mean that a savings of $1M this year can't end up being applied as the ability to spend an extra $1M next year.

I would love to be in a financial place where $1M is not "anything real" but realistically even for a billionaire that's significant.
 
Every team is allowed to use ~5mil cash in trades and to receive 5mil cash in trades annually. Us selling our pick this year doesnt have any impact on our ability to buy picks in the future. It literally is nothing but getting money to the owner aka horrible use of an asset.
Wish they had sold all three. It is worth the $4.5M in entertainment value, watching overly-certain internet guys do outrage.

But maybe our picks will play well. We’ll know soon enough - at least it won’t be like the 3 years of freeroll outrage like the Philly trade was.

If everyone’s darling Bol Bol becomes great I will bow
 
But still, under the assumption that we were targeting Kyle Guy with our second pick (which we pretty much telegraphed before the draft), isn't it better to get Guy at #55 AND $1M than to get Guy at #47 and $0? Could we have gotten a future second rounder to move down? Who knows? Might not have been offered. And even though the annual ledger on cash-in-trades resets, that doesn't mean that a savings of $1M this year can't end up being applied as the ability to spend an extra $1M next year.

I would love to be in a financial place where $1M is not "anything real" but realistically even for a billionaire that's significant.

Why risk the potential he gets taken before then? If Guy is the guy (pun intended), why are we risking losing our top choice for something that doesn't benefit the franchise down the line?
 
Why risk the potential he gets taken before then? If Guy is the guy (pun intended), why are we risking losing our top choice for something that doesn't benefit the franchise down the line?
I assume you’re not one of the many guys killing Vlade for not trying to trade-down and get James later or in FA tho
 
But still, under the assumption that we were targeting Kyle Guy with our second pick (which we pretty much telegraphed before the draft), isn't it better to get Guy at #55 AND $1M than to get Guy at #47 and $0? Could we have gotten a future second rounder to move down? Who knows? Might not have been offered. And even though the annual ledger on cash-in-trades resets, that doesn't mean that a savings of $1M this year can't end up being applied as the ability to spend an extra $1M next year.

I would love to be in a financial place where $1M is not "anything real" but realistically even for a billionaire that's significant.
Thats the other thing that was weird in this draft. At 40 we just needed to grab our dude even if he was projected to go very low 2nd/undrafted but then for our other target we were willing to risk losing him just to get the owner more money. Kind of contradicting strategies here and I wish we were little smarter with this. If we were really ready to take a small risk of missing our guy to trade back 9 spots (while not gaining anything from it) we maybe coule've applied that strategy with our 40th pick and risk waiting six selections and either pick someone else at 40 or combine it with 60 or future pick to move up ect.

Also I'm never going to support any moves like selling picks because the team gains literally nothing in them. Either you are a competent owner and utilize these cash trades in a way that they actually help the team or you get the f*** out.

Wish they had sold all three. It is worth the $4.5M in entertainment value, watching overly-certain internet guys do outrage.
Good for you I guess
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
Why risk the potential he gets taken before then? If Guy is the guy (pun intended), why are we risking losing our top choice for something that doesn't benefit the franchise down the line?
Well, again, the idea that $1M doesn't benefit the franchise seems very wrong to me. That's almost 1% of what we anticipate our player salaries to be, and depending on what our books look like, it could actually mean the difference between landing the free agent that we want and not landing him.

As far the risk goes, sure, there's risk, but as the years go by I get the feeling more and more that teams and agents have the second round scripted out a lot more than we think they do. It's possible that Guy's agent told us that he wasn't getting any bites before #55 anyway, so we felt it was a safe bet. But that's the kind of thing we won't ever know.
 
Well, again, the idea that $1M doesn't benefit the franchise seems very wrong to me. That's almost 1% of what we anticipate our player salaries to be, and depending on what our books look like, it could actually mean the difference between landing the free agent that we want and not landing him.
Cash included in trades goes to the owner. It doesnt affect the teams cap space so I dont see how it has any effect on potential free agent signings or I just dont understand your analogy.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
Cash included in trades goes to the owner. It doesnt affect the teams cap space so I dont see how it has any effect on potential free agent signings or I just dont understand your analogy.
I would assume that cash included in trades goes into the team's balance sheet, not the owner's personal bank account. And money in the team's coffers gets spent by the team, whether that's this year on free agents or next year on a second round pick or moving up in the draft, or on debt service on the arena, or whatnot. It's not like the Knicks cut a check to Vivek Ranadive and he's going to go buy a sailboat.
 
I assume you’re not one of the many guys killing Vlade for not trying to trade-down and get James later or in FA tho
Because we traded down for no reason. The $1mil doesn't affect the team operations, just the bottom line.

I absolutely would have traded down from 40, gotten a future 2nd, and taken James. Would have been really pleased with that result
 
I would assume that cash included in trades goes into the team's balance sheet, not the owner's personal bank account. And money in the team's coffers gets spent by the team, whether that's this year on free agents or next year on a second round pick or moving up in the draft, or on debt service on the arena, or whatnot. It's not like the Knicks cut a check to Vivek Ranadive and he's going to go buy a sailboat.
The money goes to the franchise and in this case its just an extra million added to the bottom line. So basically its just 1 million more to the owner or if the franchise is losing money, its one million less he has to pay for it. It cannot be used as an extra salary cap so this deal didnt get us one million more to spend on players, the amount we can spend stays the same this year and in the future.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
The money goes to the franchise and in this case its just an extra million added to the bottom line. So basically its just 1 million more to the owner or if the franchise is losing money, its one million less he has to pay for it. It cannot be used as an extra salary cap so this deal didnt get us one million more to spend on players, the amount we can spend stays the same this year and in the future.
I understand that the cash from the trade doesn't give us salary cap space, but that doesn't mean it is meaningless. There are ways for us to get over the cap, and this $1M could give us the willingness to go an extra $1M over the cap than we would have been willing to otherwise. Maybe we aren't even willing to spend up to the cap, still this $1M could give us the willingness to spend an additional $1M that we wouldn't have otherwise. This $1M could be the difference between, say, signing Kyle Guy to a rookie deal and not signing him and leaving an empty roster slot.

As fans we get into this mode of being amateur capologists playing against the cap rules with monopoly money. Sometimes we forget that NBA teams are playing the same game, but with real dollars. To Vivek and the several minority owners, this $1M is real money, with real consequences. It's easy to say, "Oh, the team is losing money and Vivek just has to pay an extra million dollars, what difference does it make?" But try putting yourself in Vivek's shoes. "Here's a million dollars of my own money, I'm going to light it on fire because it makes no difference!" Of course it makes a difference.
 
I understand that the cash from the trade doesn't give us salary cap space, but that doesn't mean it is meaningless. There are ways for us to get over the cap, and this $1M could give us the willingness to go an extra $1M over the cap than we would have been willing to otherwise. Maybe we aren't even willing to spend up to the cap, still this $1M could give us the willingness to spend an additional $1M that we wouldn't have otherwise. This $1M could be the difference between, say, signing Kyle Guy to a rookie deal and not signing him and leaving an empty roster slot.

As fans we get into this mode of being amateur capologists playing against the cap rules with monopoly money. Sometimes we forget that NBA teams are playing the same game, but with real dollars. To Vivek and the several minority owners, this $1M is real money, with real consequences. It's easy to say, "Oh, the team is losing money and Vivek just has to pay an extra million dollars, what difference does it make?" But try putting yourself in Vivek's shoes. "Here's a million dollars of my own money, I'm going to light it on fire because it makes no difference!" Of course it makes a difference.
If the owner isnt willing to make the best move for this franchise because it costs an extra million, he should get the F out. Being an owner of a Nba franchise is not for people who would put one million before maximizing the teams succes. Having that type of owner would put the team in huge competitive disadvantage and the fanbase should and would raise h**l to get the guy to sell the team. Fortunately I dont think its the case here and I would be just astonished if any player signing would ever be influenced by it costing the owner couple of extra millions.

Its different if you are a team with huge payroll without really being a championship contender and forced to pay luxury tax and maybe even repeater tax. But the we are talking about possibly paying close to 100 extra millions for that stuff so its not really comparable to just selling a draft pick for an extra million.
 
Well, again, the idea that $1M doesn't benefit the franchise seems very wrong to me. That's almost 1% of what we anticipate our player salaries to be, and depending on what our books look like, it could actually mean the difference between landing the free agent that we want and not landing him.

As far the risk goes, sure, there's risk, but as the years go by I get the feeling more and more that teams and agents have the second round scripted out a lot more than we think they do. It's possible that Guy's agent told us that he wasn't getting any bites before #55 anyway, so we felt it was a safe bet. But that's the kind of thing we won't ever know.
Warriors sold a pick to the Jazz for $2M. Does that make them incompetent too? And there were others too. Seems like a semi common practice.
 
I have to believe the powers that be with the Kings took the best players available in their opinion. I gave them a C because the little I know about Justin James and Kyle Guy tells me they might have game which translates to value as they develop. Vanja Marinkovic I only know from a couple of videos.

Honestly all these picks are most likely Summer League, G League and end of the bench fodder. Not just my opinion but thems the odds. We can have debates and hope for something more but it is up to each of these players to prove the odds wrong. Coaches can coach em, trainers can train em and fans can cheer them. But the player has to want it and work for it to have any chance to beat the odds and make the rotaion of a NBA team.
 
Because we traded down for no reason. The $1mil doesn't affect the team operations, just the bottom line.

I absolutely would have traded down from 40, gotten a future 2nd, and taken James. Would have been really pleased with that result
I would have signed off on this and, if it worked, given you a high five. But I also would have prepared myself for the possibility of that plan failing - simply because all it takes is one team that had James on their list and we didn't know about it. How many of us saw Vlade's list? Some of us were very confident that James had only worked out for 2-3 teams and was rejected by one of them. Then a James interview revealed that he worked out for a whole bunch of teams (or perhaps he is a big liar).
 
Last edited: