If Kings draft at #7, who should they take?

If Kings draft at #7 again, who should they take?

  • Total voters
    75
  • Poll closed .
twslam07 said:
Suns fans on other forums have been mentioning that they would be willing to give up 14, 18, and 27 for the 7th pick. Considering I don't like who will be available at 7, I would do that trade, but I think I would be much more willing to trade back and rid ourselves of Landry. Unfortunately, there aren't many teams willing to take on a player of Landry's caliber with such a large contract.
Click to expand...

It gives me a shudder to think of a team with three rookies and two 2nd year men on a team that needs experience. Depends on how long you want to wait until you have a team that can compete. I want one now. You might not like who is available at #7 but whoever it is better be a rotation player. I don't think any of the three picks later would see regular time. Then again, surprises happen. I am depending on a gross screw up by another gm and having someone drop to us. It's not unprecedented.


I see Bosnian Diehard beat me to it.
 
Glenn said:
It gives me a shudder to think of a team with three rookies and two 2nd year men on a team that needs experience. Depends on how long you want to wait until you have a team that can compete. I want one now. You might not like who is available at #7 but whoever it is better be a rotation player. I don't think any of the three picks later would see regular time. Then again, surprises happen. I am depending on a gross screw up by another gm and having someone drop to us. It's not unprecedented.


I see Bosnian Diehard beat me to it.
Click to expand...

Is it more likely that 7 becomes a rotation player or one of 14, 18, and 27?
 
Bosnian Diehard said:
I don't like the idea of getting three new rookies on the team (along with two sophmores who still need development).
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't like who will be available at 7, so if I can't trade the pick for an established vet, then I would like to trade back and get rid of Landry's contract and/or acquire more first round picks.
 
I don't want a rookie running this team next year, nor do I want IT or Ray running this team as starters, either one of them.

If we're going after youth and upside, do it at a position where you're not charged with running the offense and being the floor general. Hope for Vonleh to drop to us. If your goal is a rebuild over 2-3 years and waiting until guys mature, sure, you'd be higher on a Smart or an Exum. But if you're goal is to win and to put a playoff team on the floor next year, a rookie PG makes far less sense.
 
rainmaker said:
I don't want a rookie running this team next year, nor do I want IT or Ray running this team as starters, either one of them.

If we're going after youth and upside, do it at a position where you're not charged with running the offense and being the floor general. Hope for Vonleh to drop to us. If your goal is a rebuild over 2-3 years and waiting until guys mature, sure, you'd be higher on a Smart or an Exum. But if you're goal is to win and to put a playoff team on the floor next year, a rookie PG makes far less sense.
Click to expand...

Saying that sounds nice, but applying it is where it gets tricky.
 
twslam07 said:
Is it more likely that 7 becomes a rotation player or one of 14, 18, and 27?
Click to expand...

Are you trying to talk me into a discussion where I concede that one of the three is better than the #7 pick? First off, it is very unlikely and secondly, it is just as likely that the #7 surprisingly becomes better than expected as any of the three becomes a rotation player. I want the best chance at having a great player and the higher the pick, the better. I might even think differently if first rounders didn't have to be signed but they DO have to be signed. That's an incredible amount of inexperience to have on a team. We have moved past that point where teaching people how to be NBA players and should be moving to the point where we organize what we have to make the playoffs. We need veterans.

No more baby sitting!
 
Glenn said:
Are you trying to talk me into a discussion where I concede that one of the three is better than the #7 pick? First off, it is very unlikely and secondly, it is just as likely that the #7 surprisingly becomes better than expected as any of the three becomes a rotation player. I want the best chance at having a great player and the higher the pick, the better. I might even think differently if first rounders didn't have to be signed but they DO have to be signed. That's an incredible amount of inexperience to have on a team. We have moved past that point where teaching people how to be NBA players and should be moving to the point where we organize what we have to make the playoffs. We need veterans.

No more baby sitting!
Click to expand...

I've said multiple times on here that I would prefer to trade the pick for an established veteran. However, if we can't trade it for an established vet, I would prefer not to draft at #7. Smart, Stauskas, Gordon, Anderson, Harris, Saric, etc. don't excite me at #7. If there was a player I liked at #7, I would stay put and draft him.

I see this draft in a few tiers. The first tier is Embiid, Wiggins, and Parker. The second tier is Exum, Randle, Vonleh, and Smart. The third tier is Stauskas, Gordon, Anderson, Harris, Saric, Young, McDermott, Hood, and Ennis. The fourth tier is Payton, Payne, Grant, Napier, LaVine, Robinson III, Warren, and Capela. As you can see, the 7th pick would be able to pick someone from the 2nd tier. That usually indicates that it is a good value pick. However, I'm under the impression Smart will be the one who falls to us.

I personally don't like Smart. I don't think he is the right type of player to pair with Cousins and Gay. His defense is very good, but his shot selection and poor shooting leave us weak offensively. Personally, I don't come from the mindset of "well our defense is bad so let's get a player who can only play defense." I'm very particular about the types of players I want, and I don't think we should just settle for a player because he is a good defender. I want a balanced player playing PG who fits this team in the long run.

This team needs to stop changing its personnel around so we can begin to establish chemistry, but that won't happen if we are signing (Landry) and drafting (Smart) players who do not fit with the core of this team. That is why I would prefer to trade back and draft players who may actually compliment our core players. Then, and only then, chemistry can begin to grow.

EDIT: And I wasn't trying to bait you into a discussion. I was just curious what you thought the odds were when it came to hoping the 7th pick pans out to a rotational player vs one of 14, 18, or 27 panning out to a rotational player.
 
twslam07 said:
I've said multiple times on here that I would prefer to trade the pick for an established veteran. However, if we can't trade it for an established vet, I would prefer not to draft at #7. Smart, Stauskas, Gordon, Anderson, Harris, Saric, etc. don't excite me at #7. If there was a player I liked at #7, I would stay put and draft him.

I see this draft in a few tiers. The first tier is Embiid, Wiggins, and Parker. The second tier is Exum, Randle, Vonleh, and Smart. The third tier is Stauskas, Gordon, Anderson, Harris, Saric, Young, McDermott, Hood, and Ennis. The fourth tier is Payton, Payne, Grant, Napier, LaVine, Robinson III, Warren, and Capela. As you can see, the 7th pick would be able to pick someone from the 2nd tier. That usually indicates that it is a good value pick. However, I'm under the impression Smart will be the one who falls to us.

I personally don't like Smart. I don't think he is the right type of player to pair with Cousins and Gay. His defense is very good, but his shot selection and poor shooting leave us weak offensively. Personally, I don't come from the mindset of "well our defense is bad so let's get a player who can only play defense." I'm very particular about the types of players I want, and I don't think we should just settle for a player because he is a good defender. I want a balanced player playing PG who fits this team in the long run.

This team needs to stop changing its personnel around so we can begin to establish chemistry, but that won't happen if we are signing (Landry) and drafting (Smart) players who do not fit with the core of this team. That is why I would prefer to trade back and draft players who may actually compliment our core players. Then, and only then, chemistry can begin to grow.

EDIT: And I wasn't trying to bait you into a discussion. I was just curious what you thought the odds were when it came to hoping the 7th pick pans out to a rotational player vs one of 14, 18, or 27 panning out to a rotational player.
Click to expand...

I agree with pretty much everything you said but I don't think adding three rookies does anything for our stability. We have passed the point where we are looking for diamonds in the rough. If Vonleh fell to us, I'd be happy although I don't count on it. There is a 21% chance of us getting to the top three if we stay at #7.

I just want to let this all play itself out and definitely don't want to take a step backwards and I think having three rookies and 2 second year men is a step backward. I can envision the swarms of posters each player brings with him all pissed off because their favorites guy is not getting playing time. That's just my personal peeve. More of a problem is the coach being put in a position of giving three people playing time if he really wants to see if any of them can fit into the rotation. It might be better having a different goal on his mind ie playoffs. In other words, it is easier and less time consuming to see if one player fits rather than which one, two or three fit.
 
Glenn said:
I agree with pretty much everything you said but I don't think adding three rookies does anything for our stability. We have passed the point where we are looking for diamonds in the rough. If Vonleh fell to us, I'd be happy although I don't count on it. There is a 21% chance of us getting to the top three if we stay at #7.

I just want to let this all play itself out and definitely don't want to take a step backwards and I think having three rookies and 2 second year men is a step backward. I can envision the swarms of posters each player brings with him all pissed off because their favorites guy is not getting playing time. That's just my personal peeve. More of a problem is the coach being put in a position of giving three people playing time if he really wants to see if any of them can fit into the rotation. It might be better having a different goal on his mind ie playoffs. In other words, it is easier and less time consuming to see if one player fits rather than which one, two or three fit.
Click to expand...

That is a valid point and it has crossed my mind. That's why my second preference is to trade back and get rid of Landry (Trading the pick for a vet is my first and trading back to acquire more picks is my third). In this scenario, we're only bringing one rookie aboard while freeing up cap space to sign veterans (if not this offseason) next offseason.

Trading the pick for Gibson would be my ideal scenario. The more I think about it, the more I love him next to Cousins. Another 'offseason scenario' thread may be coming soon :D
 
IMO, the management will more likely trade JT first before even touching the Landry discussion.
Landry is more consistent on offense and a better pro than JT(does not easily lose cool they way JT does).

That's why we will most likely have this core going forward

C - DMC / Evans
PF - Vonleh/Landry/Acy
SF - Gay/Williams
SG - Ben/ vet
PG - vet / Ray

So again, I'm now leaning more into the Vonleh pick and it is getting more sense to me.
If we draft a rookie PG, the kid will need a lot of time not only to understand Malone's system but NBA rules as well.
So unless Derrick Rose is in this draft, a rookie PG is a 3-steps-backward-1-step-forward move, which isn't a good choice for a new ownership who seems to dedicated to show the fan base a winning team very soon.
 
Never really watched Vonleh so I'm just going off stats (which I really should not do) but he averaged less blocks than Cousins did in college in more playing time and I have read on here he's not much of a help/rotation defender why exactly would we take him?
 
andremiller07 said:
Never really watched Vonleh so I'm just going off stats (which I really should not do) but he averaged less blocks than Cousins did in college in more playing time and I have read on here he's not much of a help/rotation defender why exactly would we take him?
Click to expand...
we really really shouldn't. i really question whether anyone who wants vonleh has watched more than the draftexpress video. he is a big risk, especially if we want results sooner rather than later.
 
andremiller07 said:
Never really watched Vonleh so I'm just going off stats (which I really should not do) but he averaged less blocks than Cousins did in college in more playing time and I have read on here he's not much of a help/rotation defender why exactly would we take him?
Click to expand...

IMO, we would take the kid because of the offense first and the potential next. He can stretch the floor for a big man and that would give DMC a better room to operate. Although I was on the shotblocker next to DMC wagon a few months ago, I think DMC has slowly elevated his shot blocking stats.
Rudy has been consistent in getting help blocks as well. If we can somehow get someone like Sefolosha in the off-season and maybe Lowry or maybe Bledsoe at the point, a shot blocking big would just be icing on the cake on defense.

But I think Vonleh has enough potential though to be an above average shot blocker in the league in the long run.
 
The first DX mock including team needs went up the other day. Has Kings taking Vonleh.

Feels like a lot is going to rely on what the Lakers do. They need a point guard, but do they draft one or trade / sign one? The rest of the top 7 sort of has a PG already. There is Orlando, but if they land top 3 like they are projected too, they wouldn't take a PG there.
 
KingsCitizen said:
IMO, the management will more likely trade JT first before even touching the Landry discussion.
Landry is more consistent on offense and a better pro than JT(does not easily lose cool they way JT does).

That's why we will most likely have this core going forward

C - DMC / Evans
PF - Vonleh/Landry/Acy
SF - Gay/Williams
SG - Ben/ vet
PG - vet / Ray

So again, I'm now leaning more into the Vonleh pick and it is getting more sense to me.
If we draft a rookie PG, the kid will need a lot of time not only to understand Malone's system but NBA rules as well.
So unless Derrick Rose is in this draft, a rookie PG is a 3-steps-backward-1-step-forward move, which isn't a good choice for a new ownership who seems to dedicated to show the fan base a winning team very soon.
Click to expand...

On reddit the other day, PDA mentioned that there were a number of deals that came close to fruition that didn't ultimately get done. My guess is that one of them was JT for Jarret Jack, as there were a lot of rumors involving the two. I wonder if they'll return to those discussions this summer.

Either way, management has given every indication they want to trade JT, and I don't see them trading Landry so quickly unless it's a potential talent upgrade (like the Mbah a Moute for Williams deal). These salary dumping scenarios involving Landry seem very unrealistic, but so is everything we discuss I guess, so feel free...
 
twslam07 said:
I've said multiple times on here that I would prefer to trade the pick for an established veteran. However, if we can't trade it for an established vet, I would prefer not to draft at #7. Smart, Stauskas, Gordon, Anderson, Harris, Saric, etc. don't excite me at #7. If there was a player I liked at #7, I would stay put and draft him.

I see this draft in a few tiers. The first tier is Embiid, Wiggins, and Parker. The second tier is Exum, Randle, Vonleh, and Smart. The third tier is Stauskas, Gordon, Anderson, Harris, Saric, Young, McDermott, Hood, and Ennis. The fourth tier is Payton, Payne, Grant, Napier, LaVine, Robinson III, Warren, and Capela. As you can see, the 7th pick would be able to pick someone from the 2nd tier. That usually indicates that it is a good value pick. However, I'm under the impression Smart will be the one who falls to us.

I personally don't like Smart. I don't think he is the right type of player to pair with Cousins and Gay. His defense is very good, but his shot selection and poor shooting leave us weak offensively. Personally, I don't come from the mindset of "well our defense is bad so let's get a player who can only play defense." I'm very particular about the types of players I want, and I don't think we should just settle for a player because he is a good defender. I want a balanced player playing PG who fits this team in the long run.

This team needs to stop changing its personnel around so we can begin to establish chemistry, but that won't happen if we are signing (Landry) and drafting (Smart) players who do not fit with the core of this team. That is why I would prefer to trade back and draft players who may actually compliment our core players. Then, and only then, chemistry can begin to grow.

EDIT: And I wasn't trying to bait you into a discussion. I was just curious what you thought the odds were when it came to hoping the 7th pick pans out to a rotational player vs one of 14, 18, or 27 panning out to a rotational player.
Click to expand...

Very reasonable post. I also don't see much point to the #7 if those players you identify are available. I'd go a tad further, though, and put Smart outside of the 2nd tier, but that's my negative view of Smart. This tiered analysis leads one to either hope they get lucky and a Tier 2 or 1 falls to them at #7 (if they get #7), or they trade up, or they trade for a legit vet. The mediocrity in Tier 3 gets you nowhere. Based on what the organization did last year and their willingness to trade up, I think they'll do everything they can to do so.
 
kingwin said:
he will have to play pg, but hes as much of a pg as tyreke is...and his shot is iffy??? its looks worst than tyrekes- tyrekes problem was he pulled the ball behind his head, smarts shot looks just akward... and thats the same thing ppl said about tyreke-"if only he could shoot" - so i dont get the notion of "although i think he will be fine in the nba" -why? because the 3pt shot is futher out? - one thing i do think could be the difference between smart and tyreke is their attitudes and i mean that in a good way about smart...where tyreke was sort of this prodigy since he was young, so maybe not thinking he needed to work as hard to improve his game..as smart just has this fire in him(a la cousins) -good or bad ...could be the difference in comparing them, but style wise for me it just wouldnt make sense( to me) to let tyreke go and draft a similar(exactly the same) player and somehow sell that(for me)
Click to expand...


pshhhh.. Don't you know that I don't back losers or busts in the draft? ;) Normally my picks are golden, with exception to the Jimmer draft. I think I had Jordan Hamilton. He cannot find a niche for himself yet even after being traded to Houston. Oh well :(
 
KingsCitizen said:
IMO, the management will more likely trade JT first before even touching the Landry discussion.
Landry is more consistent on offense and crap at everything else, old, injury prone, and has a horrible, fat albatross of a contract that no GM in their right mind would ever trade for.

That's why we will most likely have this core going forward

C - DMC / Evans
PF - Vonleh/Landry/Acy
SF - Gay/Williams
SG - Ben/ vet
PG - vet / Ray

So again, I'm now leaning more into the Vonleh pick and it is getting more sense to me.
If we draft a rookie PG, the kid will need a lot of time not only to understand Malone's system but NBA rules as well.
So unless Derrick Rose is in this draft, a rookie PG is a 3-steps-backward-1-step-forward move, which isn't a good choice for a new ownership who seems to dedicated to show the fan base a winning team very soon.
Click to expand...

Fixed :p

I agree though, if we pick up Vonleh, JT is gone... Management has already tried to get rid of him. Which I think is foolish and clearly just a "cleaning house" move. JT isnt starter material by any means, but he is a good role player who D's up, rebounds, and can play either the 4 or the 5. But hey, I'm not the Gerbil, PDA is.
 
Hey, Pete D'Allesandro is on Reddit again. He has a web site devoted to draft picks, and he's asking people to chime in with who they like in the draft and why. I'll just quote him. Here is the link to the Reddit post.

(Shortened question from draft consultant)
I feel like, while every organization is moving toward embracing analytics with regard to evaluating NBA talent, there's a much larger gap when it comes to how teams use analytical tools in Draft evaluations.

Granted, it's intrinsically more difficult there because there's not nearly as much data available for college players (yet). Still, how important of a tool do you feel like advanced analytics are when it comes to Draft evaluations, as compared to more traditional measures?

Thanks again!
Click to expand...

(Pete's response, shortened)

I'm actually planning on reaching out to advanced fans and asking for their help in this Draft. I had my analytics team here at the Kings create a website where I'm asking fans to rate college players by position in the 2014 NBA Draft. I would like more than just the ranking for fans that are interested. I would like to know how they came to their decision. From this crowdsourcing, I will select a smaller group to be in my Draft think tank. A few of which I plan to invite to my war room. Below is the link and I'll be here for any questions!

http://www.kings.com/challenge
Click to expand...
 
That contest thing is pretty wild, and probably worthy of its own thread. Thanks for linking to the Reddit post, though. There were a couple other interesting nuggets.

For example, PDA confirms that he's looking for BPA over need:

In our stage you always look at the best player available. I can see how teams that are further along in development can draft for a position of need.
Click to expand...

And also that he's willing to move up or down or trade for a vet, if the opportunity presents itself:

I clearly believe we need to be willing to move up, down or even out of the draft. We've been aggressive since we took the team over and will continue to be so until we see the progress we'd like to see.
Click to expand...
 
Brick it's a shame you're not more of a college/international basketball head, as this type of thing is right up your street. Might be worth giving it a go anyway. I'm going to get something submitted if I get the time, might be able to give an insight into international ball.
 
Landry IMHO is a keeper. What kings need are shooters and perimeter players both off and def. A group of 2's and 3's behind MLM and Gay. Landry can supply the bench scoring and defense at the 4 once they figure out which of the 4 PF they keep: JT, Landry, Acy or Evans.
 
CruzDude said:
Landry IMHO is a keeper. What kings need are shooters and perimeter players both off and def. A group of 2's and 3's behind MLM and Gay. Landry can supply the bench scoring and defense at the 4 once they figure out which of the 4 PF they keep: JT, Landry, Acy or Evans.
Click to expand...


Landry provide defense? Did I read that correctly?
 
CurseOfTheSalmons said:
we really really shouldn't. i really question whether anyone who wants vonleh has watched more than the draftexpress video. he is a big risk, especially if we want results sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

you look at his overall talent and look into the future whether he can reach it. the kid has the tools and has shown flashes of skill in the videos. steven adams & drummond come to mind when they mention raw talent. alot of people suggested passing on them because of the "risk". i guess you could go the safe route and pick a nba ready player like robinson, d will or jimmer. if there wasn't a big risk he'd go in the top 3 for sure. we're picking at 7 unless the nba gods give us a gift.
 
Nurkic, I hope.
And I would trade for Porzingis (late 1º round or 2º round) a 7 footer who can shoot 3points. He is not ready, but he has a very hight ceiling
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

VF21
  • Locked
2017 Draft results
Replies
1
Views
507
VF21
VF21
Ozymandias
Here's my latest mock
Replies
28
Views
2K
Ozymandias
Ozymandias
twslam07
What Do We Do (Now That Gay is Hurt)?
Replies
1
Views
312
KingMilz
K
Y
NBA-Selections in first round of NBA Draft (Reuters)
Replies
0
Views
360
Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
Y
Darth Divac
2013 NBA draft wishlists
Replies
3
Views
726
Big Cuz 15
Big Cuz 15
Back
Top