Griffin or Thompson

[Smills91]

Just one thing that I was noticing, and Idk if it's been mentioned before but if you look at Griffin's stats, he turns the ball over ALOT.

He has 4 or more TOs in 15 games this year...6 games with at least 6 TOs and even a game with 7

Now if this is a trend in college, it will be much more magnified in the NBA. And for those who have seen his game more - what is the reason for all of these TOs?

I dunno if that always translates though. NBA refs and college refs, call a completely different brand of basketball. So what might be a TO in college (i.e. traveling) isn't always a TO in the NBA.

 

[nbrans]

I dunno if that always translates though. NBA refs and college refs, call a completely different brand of basketball. So what might be a TO in college (i.e. traveling) isn't always a TO in the NBA.

Most of Griffin's turnovers don't come from traveling, but from bad passes out of double teams and offensive fouls. He's probably not going to get double-teamed in the NBA, but I see it more as a troubling sign that he badly needs to develop his skills if he's going to be an offensive threat in the NBA, where he's going to have a size disadvantage vs. the big advantage he has in college.

 

[Warhawk]

I don't think center is OUT of position for him either. There are MANY players that play multiple positions. I don't see why you want to pigeon hole a player when Match-ups should indicate how a player is used.

Like I said, in certain situations, fine. But it would be folly to slate him to play backup center. If you are planning to have Hawes as the starter (32 min) and JT as the backup (16 min), no. Just, no. Have we learned nothing from the QD experiment?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Like I said, in certain situations, fine. But it would be folly to slate him to play backup center. If you are planning to have Hawes as the starter (32 min) and JT as the backup (16 min), no. Just, no. Have we learned nothing from the QD experiment?

Douby was a failure because there's no way he could be turned into a primary ballhandler in the NBA. But really, is there THAT big of a difference between a tall PF and a C? What exactly is it that Thompson would be asked to do as a C that he's not asked to do as a PF already?

 

[Bricklayer]

4/5s can be somewhat interchangeable, as can 2/3s. But Jason's problem is he is a terrible shotblocker and unable to shut down the middle against anybody. In typical Sacramento style thinking its "oh, look he might be abel to score there!" To which I say, "who cares you bunch of 13-49 morons." Its not a question of Jason's size (well a little bit there too -- he can be overpowered and needs to gain strength, but rookie, so we'll see), its a question of his game.

Neither Jason nor Griffin has any length on defense. Any interior intimidating ability. As that is an absolute core primary center characterisic, it makes Jason as center problematic at best unless you have a PF who can do those things for you...in which case you juat call that PF the "center" and call Jason the PF. Even the smallball teams, the David Lee atrocity in New York notwithstanding, generally admit of the necessity of that inside guy being an intimidator in there and trot out guys liek Beidrins to try to anchor things. If you don't have anybody on your frontline to anchor your defense and defend the rim, how can you ever be any kind of good defensive team? The answer is you pretty much can't barring an Andrei Kirilenko type freak to cover for you.

 

[HighTopKicks]

4/5s can be somewhat interchangeable, as can 2/3s. But Jason's problem is he is a terrible shotblocker and unable to shut down the middle against anybody. In typical Sacramento style thinking its "oh, look he might be abel to score there!" To which I say, "who cares you bunch of 13-49 morons." Its not a question of Jason's size (well a little bit there too -- he can be overpowered and needs to gain strength, but rookie, so we'll see), its a question of his game.

Neither Jason nor Griffin has any length on defense. Any interior intimidating ability. As that is an absolute core primary center characterisic, it makes Jason as center problematic at best unless you have a PF who can do those things for you...in which case you juat call that PF the "center" and call Jason the PF. Even the smallball teams, the David Lee atrocity in New York notwithstanding, generally admit of the necessity of that inside guy being an intimidator in there and trot out guys liek Beidrins to try to anchor things. If you don't have anybody on your frontline to anchor your defense and defend the rim, how can you ever be any kind of good defensive team? The answer is you pretty much can't barring an Andrei Kirilenko type freak to cover for you.

Well put, I don't know that I've ever agreed with you more. Especially,"interior intimidating ability. As that is an absolute core primary center characterisic ", and of course, "who cares you bunch of 13-49 morons".

 

[AriesMar27]

i would try to trade griffin the minute we get him.... maybe trade griffin/beno/nocioni to the suns for amare and let thompson come off the bench for another season.... then we can try to sign sessions or andre miller(to a small/short contract)...

we will suck next year as well. we wont be making the playoffs and i dont think that griffin is the player that will get us there.

 

[rainmaker]

I would like to trade Griffin if we can get our hands on him, I think we could get a very talented player(s) in return. Given the state of the economy and the fact I don't think FA's this summer will get good contracts, Griffin could be a steal for the relative cheap price his rookie contract will be.

JT can play spot minutes at the 5, but we will not rebuild into a playoff team in 2-3 years with JT as our starting center. He is physical, and will get stronger, but I would rather have him try to dominate other pf's down the road(which I think he could do in a few yrs) rather than try to contain centers for 35+ minutes a night. JT at center is a battle I don't think he could ever win.

 

[stevetaebo]

I would like to trade Griffin if we can get our hands on him, I think we could get a very talented player(s) in return. Given the state of the economy and the fact I don't think FA's this summer will get good contracts, Griffin could be a steal for the relative cheap price his rookie contract will be.

Hmm.. I think that statement is very reason why the Kings would keep Griffin. It's all ECONOMICS. The rookie contract will allow the Maloofs to keep the payroll low with the pick for 4 more years. If Griffin/KT is traded for an Amare/Bosh, it would mean paying to re-sign them at a higher salary.

Plus, Not only is Griffin cheaper option than the Amare/Bosh, he has the potential to bring people in the arena. This guy is exciting and he could be a fan favorite for his hustle and intensity. For the rookie salary, he will be a bargain.

 

[SacTownKid]

4/5s can be somewhat interchangeable, as can 2/3s. But Jason's problem is he is a terrible shotblocker and unable to shut down the middle against anybody. In typical Sacramento style thinking its "oh, look he might be abel to score there!" To which I say, "who cares you bunch of 13-49 morons." Its not a question of Jason's size (well a little bit there too -- he can be overpowered and needs to gain strength, but rookie, so we'll see), its a question of his game.

Neither Jason nor Griffin has any length on defense. Any interior intimidating ability. As that is an absolute core primary center characterisic, it makes Jason as center problematic at best unless you have a PF who can do those things for you...in which case you juat call that PF the "center" and call Jason the PF. Even the smallball teams, the David Lee atrocity in New York notwithstanding, generally admit of the necessity of that inside guy being an intimidator in there and trot out guys liek Beidrins to try to anchor things. If you don't have anybody on your frontline to anchor your defense and defend the rim, how can you ever be any kind of good defensive team? The answer is you pretty much can't barring an Andrei Kirilenko type freak to cover for you.

I think once Jason gets a grip on how not to foul every two seconds his shotblocking will come around. He could develop into a really good shotblocker IMO.

 

[hrdboild]

I'm wary of the exact thing One and Done pointed out -- do we really need another good but not great PF? If Griffin isn't the long-term answer at PF (which seems to be the case if Thompson is still in the discussion), than what would we be doing drafting him? If you trade down you can still get value from your pick but add a player to your roster who will be a better fit. I'm not sure the next Carlos Boozer is the answer for this team. Jason has been a bright spot this season, maybe even the bright spot. If you bring in Griffin there's no way around it, the two will eat into each others minutes. If Griffin is Lebron James, than who cares. You draft the talent anyway and deal with the roster ramifications. But when there's no clear 'franchise' caliber talent, I think the roster-fit becomes a bigger factor. If we're talking about a PF platoon already, there are better guys for us to take in this draft.

 

[HighTopKicks]

I think once Jason gets a grip on how not to foul every two seconds his shotblocking will come around. He could develop into a really good shotblocker IMO.

Have to agree with Brick. Intimidating defense, shotblocking and rebounding are the core traits of a good center. JT doesn't have the standing vertical or the vertical leaping ability to be a great shot blocker or to rebound with the better centers in the league.

His mobility, energy, & athleticism make him better suited for PF. He can battle for rebounds, shot the short jumper, & drive to the basket off the dribble. Griffin has obviously spent more time in the weight room, as can be seen in his arms when he dunks. Plus his greater vertical leaping ability, puts him ahead of JT as far as rebounding inspite of the height difference. We'll just have to see about the other offensive skills.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

I think Thompson's the type of guy where once he gets further acclimated to the league (the game still seems to move too fast for him at times, especially defensively) he'll cut down on the careless turnovers and crazy hacking fouls...and that will open up some more possibilities in terms of his confidence. He's already solid at scoring and rebounding, and those should look really develop for him.

I think the scoring in particular has some potential; he dunks the ball at a very good frequency (#24 in the league in dunks, and that's only in 26 mpg), finishes well around the basket (61%), and is willing to really develop his jumpshot (takes nearly 50% of his shots from there, but only hits 36% so far--but with more experience/confidence that should improve). I think there's some all-around scoring potential with him with his inside-outside game--the post moves are questionable, but the face up game can develop well.

It seems like Jason is a far better offensive rebounder right now than he is defensive, as after all he is a good albeit foul prone hustle player right now. I think the defensive rebounding can develop.

Defensively, he has mobility and lateral quickness but he seems a little lost out there at times, and doesn't seem to guard the three point shooters or guys who can stretch the defense well. Not to mention he's extremely foul prone. I really don't think he's ever going to a shotblocker in this league at all (maybe he'll average slightly above 1 in his prime, but any more than that--really doubtful) because he doesn't have the timing down, not to mention that he's not very athletic. I wish he could steal the ball somewhat or play solid positional defense to compensate, but it seems the best we can hope for is just the solid positional defense. This is actually the area where I have the most concern, despite the mobility.

I don't really think JT has superstar potential (more like super role player potential in combination with hustle ability), but that being said I'm not enamored with Griffin either, as he's just a more bouncy version of Carlos Boozer with all the same weaknesses--questionable defensive technique, undersized, etc. We need a pass first unselfish PG, and we shouldn't get any duplicates here.

 

[Prince_XY]

Since I don't see the Kings trading Thompson just because we drafted Griffin in this coming draft, I only see two options:

OPTION 1: Keep Thompson and draft Griffin:

#5 Hawes ( 7' 0" ), undersized Thompson ( 6' 11" )
#4 Thompson ( 6' 11" ), Griffin ( 6' 10" )
#3 Greene ( 6' 10 " )

OPTION 2: Keep Thompson and draft someone else:

#5 Hawes ( 7' 0" ), Thabeet ( 7' 3" )
#4 Thompson ( 6' 11), Hawes ( 7' 0" )
#3 Greene ( 6' 10" ), Thompson ( 6' 11" )

OR

#1 Rubio ( 6' 4" )


--------

I go for option #2 above for all the reasons already stated by others and mainly because there is just too much duplication of talent we already have ( in Hawes and Thompson ) if we take Griffin.

Also, I see a need for a player like Thabeet as our second hope at #5, since Hawes may still turn out to be the biggest bust amongst our current bigs. Hawes is very inconsistent. I don't want to pin my hopes in him because he's got that previous injury which can recur anytime, or which can cause him not to play as hard as he can. ( If you are sure to earn millions yearly, you don't want to play as hard and risk having a career-ending-injury. You want to earn those millions as long as you can - common sense )



.

 

[Kingster]

This is ridiculous. Just because someone can play multiple positions doesn't mean they are better at those positions than someone else. If Griffin can only play PF that's fine, as long as he turns out to be a very good one. You start Hawes next to him, and have JT get all the backup minutes at both positions. Or if Griffin isn't ready yet, you start Shock & Hawes, and slide JT over to the 5 when Blake scomes in.

Even if you split the minutes evenly, each ends up with 36, which is a good amount. Donte can get spot minutes at the 4, depending on foul trouble and Griffin's readiness, etc, but he shouldn't be getting major minutes there. You don't not select the best player with your #1 pick because of Donte Greene... Come on, now. If Greene's ready, then someone like Nocioni or Garcia has to go.

Wow, where do I start? First, you provide the red herring ("Just because someone can play multiple positions doesn't mean they are better at those positions than someone else.") In answer to the red herring, I would say that being able to play two positions is one factor in evaluating talent, not the necessary and only factor. Second, you assume Griffin is the best player in the draft (please make your case). Third, you assume that Griffin is better than Greene (why?). Fourth, you assume that I'm saying not to draft Griffin because of Greene (how, I have no idea). Instead, I'm saying that maybe the fact that Greene is more of an athlete than Griffin (quicker, faster, longer, and can jump just as high) and can play the 3 and 4 down the line should give people pause about claiming Griffin to be the best player in the draft.

 

[Kingster]

I fail to see why people think that players should be moved out of their natural position all the time. He's a 4. He plays the 4. Spot minutes at the 3 or 5 on occasion when necessary, maybe OK. But not on a regular basis.

Think match-up, not position. Just throw out the concept of whole numbers - 1,2,3,4,5 and think real numbers where players have skills measured in small fractions along a coninuum. It really doesn't matter what you call them, it's how they can take advantage of their strengths and minimize their weaknesses relative to the player they go up against. As an example, Brad Miller (the "center") could be guarded by a "power forward". So, the notion of center against center is moot. Magic Johnson could guard Brad Miller. He was a "point guard". So there you have a point guard guarding a center. How can that be in this fixed conceptual world of pg, small forward, big guard center and two guard? It only makes sense if you throw out entirely those fixed notions of position. All this talk concerning positions is a lazy, very approximate way to describe a player's skill set.

 

[gunks]

True....But JT can play the 3 like Noc can play the 5.

It can be done....But the results more often then not doesnt really encourage the experiments.

 

[bajaden]

I see this as a one step at a time sort of thing. If the Kings get the #1 pick, then you listen to offers and see if you can get a good young player and/or cap relief in exchange for trading down. If you get the right deal: trade Griffin.

If, however, a deal like that doesn't work, then I think you draft Griffin, have him back up Thompson, and see how he performs. If Griffin looks like a star but Hawes/Thompson/Grififn aren't gelling as a 3 big man rotation, then you start listening to offers for Thompson. Otherwise Griffin could be included in the right deal.

Don't think it's really possible to plan too far ahead on this one.

Hey! Were in agreement. God I feel better.

 

[bajaden]

Which is exactly what Reynolds has said. And continuing with the Reynolds theme, he's also saying that it's important in the non-center/pg positions to have guys with the skills to play two or more positions. So, with Hawes, Thompson and Greene, you have guys who can play more than one position. Can Griffin? NO NO NO. He can't play the three because he doesn't have the athletic ability to be a three, and he certainly can't play center because he's not big enough. If you think he's athletic enough to play the three, then watch him, then watch Greene (hopefully you have some tape). Greene is superior to Griffin in athletic ability. He does has the potential to play the three. Already, he can play the four pretty well. It's power forward or bust for Griffin. Which makes me think the Kings would not pick him #1 if they do get the #1 pick.

Having watched Griffin play at least 20 times, I don't think your giving him enough credit for his athleticisim. He's a terrific athlete. Now, having said that, he's a power forward. He could spot at center in the right match-up, but, there's nothing wrong with being a good power forward. I don't remember seeing Malone playing center or small forward. Not saying it didn't happen at some point, but he was known as a pure power forward.

I simply don't see the problem with having two good players at the same position on your team. Most of us ***** about not having players that anyone wants, and therefore we can't make a trade. Having two very good players who play the same position puts you in position to deal for someone who plays a position of need.

 

[bajaden]

Think match-up, not position. Just throw out the concept of whole numbers - 1,2,3,4,5 and think real numbers where players have skills measured in small fractions along a coninuum. It really doesn't matter what you call them, it's how they can take advantage of their strengths and minimize their weaknesses relative to the player they go up against. As an example, Brad Miller (the "center") could be guarded by a "power forward". So, the notion of center against center is moot. Magic Johnson could guard Brad Miller. He was a "point guard". So there you have a point guard guarding a center. How can that be in this fixed conceptual world of pg, small forward, big guard center and two guard? It only makes sense if you throw out entirely those fixed notions of position. All this talk concerning positions is a lazy, very approximate way to describe a player's skill set.

Back when I used to watch Pettit, Wilt, Robertson, etc. You had a center, two forwards and two guards. Although Pettit is considered a power forward today, he was simply a forward back then. No one called Robertson a point guard, and there are people today when recalling the great point guards of all time, will forget Robertson. But how can you forget his 12 assists a game.

So in a way, I agree with your point, and in another way, its really just semantics. If your a power forward and your athletic enough to guard small forwards at times, does that make you a small forward? No, of course not. Does it make you versital? Yes. But, if your a power forward, your strengths are at that position. I mean its easy to pick and choose the senario you want and make it work. Sure, Magic could have guarded Miller. Could he have guarded Akeem or Shaq, or Wilt, or Jabar? Probably not very well. This is a league that uses identifiers. Its a bit contentious of you to call people lazy just because their using the monikers with which they've been presented.

 

[Kingster]

Having watched Griffin play at least 20 times, I don't think your giving him enough credit for his athleticisim. He's a terrific athlete. Now, having said that, he's a power forward. He could spot at center in the right match-up, but, there's nothing wrong with being a good power forward. I don't remember seeing Malone playing center or small forward. Not saying it didn't happen at some point, but he was known as a pure power forward.

I simply don't see the problem with having two good players at the same position on your team. Most of us ***** about not having players that anyone wants, and therefore we can't make a trade. Having two very good players who play the same position puts you in position to deal for someone who plays a position of need.

I just don't see the "terrific athlete". I see a guy who can be guarded by centers in college. That doesn't imply great athlete to me, and it is very worrisome. I also don't see a guy who makes an impact on defense. He looks small on defense. Again, that doesn't imply great athlete either. The occassional dunk just doesn't make it for me. He can jump high. He is pretty fast. He can rebound. He has good hands. He just doesn't have the quicks (the factor I weigh the most) or the fluidity to make it into terrific athlete category for me.

 

[upinsmoke]

There is no reason to trade thompson just because Griffin might be coming in. A 3 big man rotation would be nice.

 

[Sac.1989]

draft griffen and let our rotation sort itself out. PG can be sorted with free agency or our lower pick

 

[SacTownKid]

Have to agree with Brick. Intimidating defense, shotblocking and rebounding are the core traits of a good center. JT doesn't have the standing vertical or the vertical leaping ability to be a great shot blocker or to rebound with the better centers in the league.

His mobility, energy, & athleticism make him better suited for PF. He can battle for rebounds, shot the short jumper, & drive to the basket off the dribble. Griffin has obviously spent more time in the weight room, as can be seen in his arms when he dunks. Plus his greater vertical leaping ability, puts him ahead of JT as far as rebounding inspite of the height difference. We'll just have to see about the other offensive skills.

Despite whatever level of player Jason was up against in college, I can't see Jason going from nearly a 3 bpg player in college to a non-existent interior defender in the NBA.

 

[bajaden]

I just don't see the "terrific athlete". I see a guy who can be guarded by centers in college. That doesn't imply great athlete to me, and it is very worrisome. I also don't see a guy who makes an impact on defense. He looks small on defense. Again, that doesn't imply great athlete either. The occassional dunk just doesn't make it for me. He can jump high. He is pretty fast. He can rebound. He has good hands. He just doesn't have the quicks (the factor I weigh the most) or the fluidity to make it into terrific athlete category for me.

Perhaps my friend, your only seeing what you want to see. I won't argue the point with you. I see a terrific athlete, and you don't. So be it.

 

[bajaden]

Not that NBAdraft.com is the be all, end all, but their opinion of Griffin is similar to mine.

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/blake-griffin

 

[Bricklayer]

Not that NBAdraft.com is the be all, end all, but their opinion of Griffin is similar to mine.

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/blake-griffin

Two things -- one, you will note that that thing was written in 2006 and they made a point of mentioning what intimidating size he would have...for a SF. Second thing, I agree wiht the athelte thing -- I'm not sure at all how you could look at him, as a PF, and see anything byut a remarkable athlete. But what he is not, and where nbadraft.net gets it wrong rigth from the start, is long. On the contrary, he is "short". And I suspect that is where some of the "not agreat athelte" stuff comes from. He's a remarkable athelte for a big man, but as a Davis Lee type player. He's not long, does not extend, doesn't have huge reach long arms, shotblocking, explosive from out of nowhere reach etc. He's an excellent athelte -- if you factor in strength a much better one that almost all NBA bigs in a gneeral sense. But he's not a perfect basketball athlete, where length can make a huge difference. He'll never be able to block an NBA shot, and at this poitn his position defense is in question too. He's not going to be an alley opp target in all liklihood. But he's got a motor, quickness, and strength.

 

[RIP miyagi]

griffin is still young so who knows if he he won't sprout up in the new few years. I don't think thompson is the problem, i think its spencer hawes. I would rather get rid of hawes before thompson. Defense is a huge problem for both players so there's really nothing to say for that, but maybe if we brought in a good point guard to feed them the ball, instead of another big man, that would be another problem solver. I'm guess the basketball gods decide to rain on the kings again and we end up with the 6th pick, haha.

 

[Bricklayer]

griffin is still young so who knows if he he won't sprout up in the new few years. I don't think thompson is the problem, i think its spencer hawes. I would rather get rid of hawes before thompson. Defense is a huge problem for both players so there's really nothing to say for that, but maybe if we brought in a good point guard to feed them the ball, instead of another big man, that would be another problem solver. I'm guess the basketball gods decide to rain on the kings again and we end up with the 6th pick, haha.

You just can't pait Thompson and Griffin. they are the same player, and the quite possibly the worst defensive pairing in the NBA. Hawes is soft but at least gives us a little length.

 

[RIP miyagi]

You just can't pait Thompson and Griffin. they are the same player, and the quite possibly the worst defensive pairing in the NBA. Hawes is soft but at least gives us a little length.

Pait? What good is Hawes' length if he does nothing with it. He looks like its hard for enough for him to walk sometimes.