If the kings are in the top 3 we will get irving!

[Demarcus Cousins]

Minn has pg's already
raptors dont need a pg.
Wizards got wall
nets got dwill
pistons got stucky
clippers got gordon
bucks got jennings
gs got curry

those are the only teams that have a real shot at number 1
all of them have there pg for the future. We are getting irving just like how we got demarcus
trust me! If we get in top 3 we will get him

 

[Bricklayer]

Minn has pg's already
raptors dont need a pg.
Wizards got wall
nets got dwill
pistons got stucky
clippers got gordon
bucks got jennings
gs got curry

those are the only teams that have a real shot at number 1
all of them have there pg for the future. We are getting irving just like how we got demarcus
trust me! If we get in top 3 we will get him

Er..you are really stretching it.

These work:

Minn has pg's already
Wizards got wall
nets got dwill*
bucks got jennings
gs got curry

These don't:

raptors dont need a pg.
pistons got stucky
clippers got gordon

and you forgot Cleveland, who definitely needs one, and Charlotte, who I doubt would pass on Irving just for Augustin. Also I think Utah has Jersey's pick, and while they brought back Devin Harris in the deal, its not har at all to see them bring in a new young kid to be their stud there in the future.

You also might be forgetting that we have ours too. What future is there for Irving here with Reke/Thornton already in town? Or are we that sold on a kid after a dozen games of college ball?

 

[rainmaker]

So according to you, we're going to have Irving, Stuckey, Brooks, and Reke all sharing time at point next year, and only those 4 because you forgot Beno was on our team.

My conclusion:you shouldn't be allowed to make any more threads until you get out of rehab. You don't even make sense, or even respond in your own rediculous threads. And to think Tor would pass because of Calderon, and Det would pass because of Stuckey is rediculous. Gordon is a sg buddy. Mo Williams runs the point for the Clips. Quit making dumb threads without a point to them.

 

[Demarcus Cousins]

we pick ahead of utah tho so there irrelevant

 

[Capt. Factorial]

we pick ahead of utah tho so there irrelevant

Let me get this straight. Our #5 lotto slot is ahead of Utah's #6 lotto slot, so they're irrelevant, but you considered New Jersey, who doesn't even HAVE a lottery pick, to be relevant?

 

[NowImLost]

I have no idea who the crap we are going to draft.
Trade down, draft Biyombo.
That's it.

 

[Bricklayer]

I have no idea who the crap we are going to draft.

Might be the most sensible post in the whole forum.

We're actually back in an interesting position. Two years ago when we drafted Reke we were almost in a "draft the best talent" position, because we only had one long term starter in Kevin, and all else was flux. Now we are are almost back in a "draft the best talent" position, but now its because we might have already found 4 of our 5 starters, and have the money to go out after our 5th. So it means we can take almost any rookie at any position to strengthen the bench, and develop him for the future, without him having to step in and plug a major whole from the moment he enters the league. We have no positional need so strong as to overwhelm the draft the best player instinct.

 

[JB_kings]

Yeah I'm about as thrilled about this draft as I was about the 1989 draft. Which means we are definitely getting the #1 slot. Haha
The bad news is that you likely aren't going to get a star player anywhere in this draft and have to hope the player can actually be a capable starter some day. If ever there was a time to trade the pick, this would be the one.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Yeah I'm about as thrilled about this draft as I was about the 1989 draft. Which means we are definitely getting the #1 slot. Haha
The bad news is that you likely aren't going to get a star player anywhere in this draft and have to hope the player can actually be a capable starter some day. If ever there was a time to trade the pick, this would be the one.

Again, you're severely underrating the talent in this draft. It really isn't that bad. There isn't a surefire number 1 pick like in some years past (even in Griffin's draft, there were naysayers). Both Irving and Williams would be talked about in the top 3 of the vast majority of drafts down through the years, and Kanter is a guy who could genuinely turn into one of the elite big men in the NBA. Then you have a very solid plethora of second tier guys who could really help out the team - Knight, the Europeans guys, etc.. It is never a good idea to trade a high draft pick unless you are getting a sure thing back.

 

[bajaden]

Minn has pg's already
raptors dont need a pg.
Wizards got wall
nets got dwill
pistons got stucky
clippers got gordon
bucks got jennings
gs got curry

those are the only teams that have a real shot at number 1
all of them have there pg for the future. We are getting irving just like how we got demarcus
trust me! If we get in top 3 we will get him

Never discount Kahn's desire to collect as many PG's as possible. Not to mention that Irving would probably be better than any PG on his team, and that includes some guy named Rubio.

You've forgotten Cleveland, who might jump at the chance to take Irving. Although, they could use a legitimate center like Kanter instead of Bargnani, who plays more like a SF.

All Toronto has is Calderon with Bayless backing him up. Calderon is nice, but he's not the long term answer, and they probably have serious doubts about Bayless being his long term replacement. So I doubt Toronto would pass on Irving.

Eric Gordon of the Clippers is not a PG. He's a SG. The only point guard on the Clips is Mo Williams, and he leaves a lot to be desired without LeBron to pass the ball to. I think the Clips would grab Irving in a heartbeat.

 

[bajaden]

Yeah I'm about as thrilled about this draft as I was about the 1989 draft. Which means we are definitely getting the #1 slot. Haha
The bad news is that you likely aren't going to get a star player anywhere in this draft and have to hope the player can actually be a capable starter some day. If ever there was a time to trade the pick, this would be the one.

First off, your wrong! There will be stars emerge from this draft. Probably a couple from the second round. There will be players that are simply better NBA players than they were college players, just due to the system they were forced to play in, or the position they were forced to play that may have not been their natural position. It happens every year, and it'll happen this year as well. The hard part is figuring out who those players are.

But taking your second premise of just trading away the pick. If we don't value the pick, then how much value would the pick have in a trade? Would it be just a throw in to sweeten some deal. You have to be careful here. If we pick at 5 for instance, and pass up a Knight or a Leonard, and whomever you pass up ends up being a star player in the league, your going to eat some serious crow. Particularly on this fourm, where folks have long memories.

 

[=LarryLegend=]

Eric Gordon of the Clippers is not a PG. He's a SG. The only point guard on the Clips is Mo Williams, and he leaves a lot to be desired without LeBron to pass the ball to. I think the Clips would grab Irving in a heartbeat.

Baja Clips traded their pick with the Baron trade remember?

 

[bajaden]

Might be the most sensible post in the whole forum.

We're actually back in an interesting position. Two years ago when we drafted Reke we were almost in a "draft the best talent" position, because we only had one long term starter in Kevin, and all else was flux. Now we are are almost back in a "draft the best talent" position, but now its because we might have already found 4 of our 5 starters, and have the money to go out after our 5th. So it means we can take almost any rookie at any position to strengthen the bench, and develop him for the future, without him having to step in and plug a major whole from the moment he enters the league. We have no positional need so strong as to overwhelm the draft the best player instinct.

I tend to be a BPA guy no matter what. Unless of course you have a couple, three players that are all of equal ability for their positions. Then I would lean toward the player that best fits the needs of the team. In the worse case scenario of our picking 8th, the number of players that might be of equal ability increases two fold, and the selection process becomes more difficult. In any event, we should get a good player, and at the very least, add depth to our bench.

In my opinion, the two positions where the most minutes would be available, are SF, and possibly as the 4th big off the bench. Either of those positions could be filled in the top 3, with Kanter or Williams, or at number 8 with a variety of players like Leonard, Hamilton, Morris, Thompson Biyombo, etc. Having said that, is someone like Knight slides down to us at 5, 6, or 7, I take him because he's the best player available.

So in a long winded way, I agree with you.

 

[JB_kings]

You never know, there might be a Brandon Roy or Lamarcus Aldridge in the draft like there was in 2006. But there is even a better chance you are getting a player you are less than thrilled with. Look at the names that were drafted around those players in 2006. Maybe there will be some guys that eventually become stars. A few years down the road. It's just going to take those guys some time. If the Kings land a good pick and can include that in a trade and get back a known talent that can provide immediate help, I would rather do that. Maybe even pick up that late first or early second round pick to get that raw player to develop. The Kings have some young talent that is already growing and one that hasn't even had a chance to play yet. At some point you can have too many young players and not enough veteran experience. I don't know if they can trade the pick. Maybe most GMs don't like this draft either. But the excitement level over this years crop is a mystery to me.

 

[bajaden]

Baja Clips traded their pick with the Baron trade remember?

Hey, I have trouble remembering who I'am. Thanks for the reminder..

 

[=LarryLegend=]

Is there a chance we can fall to 7?

 

[TTown Kings]

Is there a chance we can fall to 7?

yes, there is even a very small chance we can slip to 8. I believe the odds of falling to 8 are like .7%

 

[pilot305]

yes, there is even a very small chance we can slip to 8. I believe the odds of falling to 8 are like .7%

...and haven't we've been known to slip on more than a few occasions? Maybe its me but it seems like it...

 

[bajaden]

You never know, there might be a Brandon Roy or Lamarcus Aldridge in the draft like there was in 2006. But there is even a better chance you are getting a player you are less than thrilled with. Look at the names that were drafted around those players in 2006. Maybe there will be some guys that eventually become stars. A few years down the road. It's just going to take those guys some time. If the Kings land a good pick and can include that in a trade and get back a known talent that can provide immediate help, I would rather do that. Maybe even pick up that late first or early second round pick to get that raw player to develop. The Kings have some young talent that is already growing and one that hasn't even had a chance to play yet. At some point you can have too many young players and not enough veteran experience. I don't know if they can trade the pick. Maybe most GMs don't like this draft either. But the excitement level over this years crop is a mystery to me.

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I'm a college basketball guy, and I spend a lot of time watching most of these guys play. So from a selfish point of view, I will have wasted all the time I spent watching well over 200 college games this past season. Some more than once. As a result, my perspective is likely to be different from the casual observer.

However, I'm not against trading the pick. But first I need to know exactly what the trade is. I can't agree to some unknown quanity. The quality of the player we would be aquiring in the trade would have to far outweigh the value of the potential of the draft pick. Particularly on the ability side of the trade. Yes the team is in need of some veteran experience. But just not any veteran player will do. It has to be someone that has impact on the team. The team isn't without veterans. Dalembert and Cisco would certainly fall into that catagory. At this point you'd have to call Beno a veteran. Thompson will be entering his fourth year.

So the question is, who would you trade for, that you can't aquire through freeagency. Of course thats a thread of its own, and more of a rhetorical question here. Remember this, the player you select in the draft is yours for 4 years, probably 5, and for a lesser price that any veteran worth his salt will cost. Thats why I say the aquired player has to be considerably better abiltiy wise, than the draft pick. It all comes down to how much bang you get for your buck.

As far as people getting excited about the draft. All a matter of taste mi amigo. We see it as a means of improving the team, and love the suspense and excitement surrounding it. Vicariously, for just a brief time, we all become GM's.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

You also might be forgetting that we have ours too. What future is there for Irving here with Reke/Thornton already in town? Or are we that sold on a kid after a dozen games of college ball?

This got me thinking a little bit. Along with a tweet from Jason Jones that basically said he thinks the team NEEDS a pg....

It seems like there is a group of people .. some fans, some media guys, some front office peeps who think Evans can be our SF.

If you sign Thornton and draft Irving or Knight .. somewhere down the line your planning on starting Evans/Thornton/Draft pick.

I hate the idea of going small. Now, Evans wouldnt be small for an SF .. but he would be below average .. but then Thornton is below average for a SG too .. I just think we have a unique core of talent that are also really big for where they play. I want to do whatever I can to keep that dynamic.

With how close the players in our draft range are in talent... If we draft a PG it will tell us a lot about the vision of this team.

 

[rainmaker]

This got me thinking a little bit. Along with a tweet from Jason Jones that basically said he thinks the team NEEDS a pg....

It seems like there is a group of people .. some fans, some media guys, some front office peeps who think Evans can be our SF.

If you sign Thornton and draft Irving or Knight .. somewhere down the line your planning on starting Evans/Thornton/Draft pick.

I hate the idea of going small. Now, Evans wouldnt be small for an SF .. but he would be below average .. but then Thornton is below average for a SG too .. I just think we have a unique core of talent that are also really big for where they play. I want to do whatever I can to keep that dynamic.

With how close the players in our draft range are in talent... If we draft a PG it will tell us a lot about the vision of this team.

That's where I disagree. While some are considering a pg, and the writing is on the wall, I would NOT do it at the expense of moving Reke to the 3. No way. Won't consider it. If we draft or aquire a point, it's in order to move Thornton to 6th man, which I don't have a problem with, if it improves the backcourt and overall depth.

I've said I would consider taking a pg. Irving or Knight if available, depending on who else is available. I have Williams as #1 for us, given the need he feels. I also like Kanter a lot. Most here question why I'd draft a pg and move Marcus to 6th man. Well, I'd consider it, because I think 6th man is the most natural role for Marcus. But again, I have no problem starting both Reke/Marcus next year, and seeing how it plays out after a full training a camp and more time together. It's not that I don't like them together as a backcourt, its that I'm not so confident in them that I wouldn't consider drafting or aquiring another pg. My guess is that is where Petrie and other FO types are. They are looking at all options, and considering a pg if available. Doesn't mean they don't have confidence in what Reke/Thornton can do, and doesn't mean we'll aquire a pg.

But Reke at the 3 is a horrible idea.

 

[bajaden]

This got me thinking a little bit. Along with a tweet from Jason Jones that basically said he thinks the team NEEDS a pg....

It seems like there is a group of people .. some fans, some media guys, some front office peeps who think Evans can be our SF.

If you sign Thornton and draft Irving or Knight .. somewhere down the line your planning on starting Evans/Thornton/Draft pick.

I hate the idea of going small. Now, Evans wouldnt be small for an SF .. but he would be below average .. but then Thornton is below average for a SG too .. I just think we have a unique core of talent that are also really big for where they play. I want to do whatever I can to keep that dynamic.

With how close the players in our draft range are in talent... If we draft a PG it will tell us a lot about the vision of this team.

There may be times when Evans could guard the SF position. Certainly against the Paul Pierce's of the world, where he's not giving up much size in the exchange. But on a permanent basis, no! With Evans and Thornton in the backcourt, we have a size advantage in a high percentage of the matchups. If we go with Irving, Thornton, and Evans, we're giving up size. I can see Petrie looking for more ballhandling off the bench in either a PG or a combo guard. But off the bench, and not to be inserted in the starting lineup. I guess we'll see.

 

[bajaden]

That's where I disagree. While some are considering a pg, and the writing is on the wall, I would NOT do it at the expense of moving Reke to the 3. No way. Won't consider it. If we draft or aquire a point, it's in order to move Thornton to 6th man, which I don't have a problem with, if it improves the backcourt and overall depth.

I've said I would consider taking a pg. Irving or Knight if available, depending on who else is available. I have Williams as #1 for us, given the need he feels. I also like Kanter a lot. Most here question why I'd draft a pg and move Marcus to 6th man. Well, I'd consider it, because I think 6th man is the most natural role for Marcus. But again, I have no problem starting both Reke/Marcus next year, and seeing how it plays out after a full training a camp and more time together. It's not that I don't like them together as a backcourt, its that I'm not so confident in them that I wouldn't consider drafting or aquiring another pg. My guess is that is where Petrie and other FO types are. They are looking at all options, and considering a pg if available. Doesn't mean they don't have confidence in what Reke/Thornton can do, and doesn't mean we'll aquire a pg.

But Reke at the 3 is a horrible idea.

I'm still curious as to why you only see Thornton as a 6th man. What is it that you see that I don't. Or is it just some gut feeling that you have thats not based on anything visual. Because to best of my knowledge, he played extremely well as a starter.

But that aside, I want someone to explain to me why the Kings need a so called pure point guard? I think we can all agree that at the moment, Tyreke needs the ball in his hands to be most effective. Irving, who I really like as a player, would have to have the ball in his hands to best use his talents. By the same token, Thornton proved last season that he plays very well off the ball. Now to these blurry aging eyes, that makes Thornton the Ying to Evans Yang. In other words, a very good fit. Unlike the situation you have at Golden State with Ellis and Curry fighting over ball possesions.

I could see drafting Irving, and bringing him off the bench behind Evans as the ball distributer. You could even have Beno play the 2 in certain situations with Irving. But then I'm of the mind that we don't need a true PG on our team. And I pay little attention to the pundits around the league, most of whom can't even tell you who all the players on our team are, much less who we need. I read an article in one of the papers that speculated we would certainly take Kanter if we had the chance, because we were likely to trade Cousins because of all the trouble he caused on the team. This is the typical wealth of knowledge you run into when traveling around the league.

So I pay little attention to the pundits, including Chad Ford and his cronies, when they start expounding on any teams needs. Who knows this team better than we do? I'll certainly give Jason Jones credit for local knowledge, but in most of his reports, he's reporting someone elses observations, and not his own. But hey, we agree that Evans at the three is a bad idea. I just love it when we can find common ground.

 

[rainmaker]

I'm still curious as to why you only see Thornton as a 6th man. What is it that you see that I don't. Or is it just some gut feeling that you have thats not based on anything visual. Because to best of my knowledge, he played extremely well as a starter.

But that aside, I want someone to explain to me why the Kings need a so called pure point guard? I think we can all agree that at the moment, Tyreke needs the ball in his hands to be most effective. Irving, who I really like as a player, would have to have the ball in his hands to best use his talents. By the same token, Thornton proved last season that he plays very well off the ball. Now to these blurry aging eyes, that makes Thornton the Ying to Evans Yang. In other words, a very good fit. Unlike the situation you have at Golden State with Ellis and Curry fighting over ball possesions.

I could see drafting Irving, and bringing him off the bench behind Evans as the ball distributer. You could even have Beno play the 2 in certain situations with Irving. But then I'm of the mind that we don't need a true PG on our team. And I pay little attention to the pundits around the league, most of whom can't even tell you who all the players on our team are, much less who we need. I read an article in one of the papers that speculated we would certainly take Kanter if we had the chance, because we were likely to trade Cousins because of all the trouble he caused on the team. This is the typical wealth of knowledge you run into when traveling around the league.

So I pay little attention to the pundits, including Chad Ford and his cronies, when they start expounding on any teams needs. Who knows this team better than we do? I'll certainly give Jason Jones credit for local knowledge, but in most of his reports, he's reporting someone elses observations, and not his own. But hey, we agree that Evans at the three is a bad idea. I just love it when we can find common ground.

It is more of a gut feeling, and kinda has to be given both Reke and Marcus are 2 years in. I watched Marcus a fair ammount while with NO last year, mainly because I like watching CP3, and keeping tabs on Peja. In what I saw last year, as well as this year with us, my eyes tell me he's a natural high scoring 6th man. I'm just not sold on him being a fulltime starting guard, especially next to a guy like Reke, who up until this point thinks shoot first.

I didn't see Reke and Marcus playing off each other as much as you did I guess. I saw them competing for shots, with Cousins as well. I saw a reluctance from both to play inside out, or even give Cousins the ball on nights he was rolling. Maybe that will change after a training camp, or a more structured offense is implemented. I'm not sure. I'll let the powers that be decide.

I like Marcus a lot, and if Petrie and Westy decide they are our backcourt next season, I'm fine with it. Maybe I'm completely off point here, and after an offseason and full training camp, they'll mesh better both together and with the team, and they'll solidiy the backcourt for years to come. But I'm not completely confident they will, at least not the point we don't take an Irving if available, or even consider adding a point. With them I also see two young natural scorers, who want to make their mark in this league. Will they both be able to temper that enough to help the team? I don't know.

I'm nervous about having a starting backcourt where neither player looks comfortable running a team. Yes I do think Reke could get there, and he'll have the ball in his hands a lot no matter what. That's also why I'd never pair him with a Rubio/Rondo type, because they're both worthless off the ball. I've never been high on the idea of having two 20+pt scorers in the same backcourt, and even moreso with arguably a top 3 offensive center on the team, who's also arguably our best playmaker/creator at this point.

Its only my opinion, but down the road I think Reke will be best with the ball looking to score or create for others, with someone next to him who can hit the open shot, but doesn't require shots, and can create for himself or others when need be. I also think Marcus will be best in a role where he mostly looks to score. For both Marcus and Reke, their strength is scoring, and the more we try to turn them into creators, the more we take away from their strengths, and the more they look to score, the more they take away from Cousins.

Its not the same, but I'd compare it a little to OKC, with Harden, Durant, and Westbrook. Harden could start for them, and is a very good offensive player. But with him in the starting lineup, it might take away from what Durant/Westbrook do. Coming off the bench really allows Harden to play his game, and all 3 end up having a larger impact on the game. As Cousins/Reke mature, I see having another guy looking to score20+ in the starting lineup taking away from their games somewhat, whereas if Marcus comes off the bench, he can do what he does best, score, without affecting any chemistry between Reke and Cousins.

 

[vikinginferno]

It's sad that people want to give up every advantage Reke has and move him to the SF position...

 

[bajaden]

It is more of a gut feeling, and kinda has to be given both Reke and Marcus are 2 years in. I watched Marcus a fair ammount while with NO last year, mainly because I like watching CP3, and keeping tabs on Peja. In what I saw last year, as well as this year with us, my eyes tell me he's a natural high scoring 6th man. I'm just not sold on him being a fulltime starting guard, especially next to a guy like Reke, who up until this point thinks shoot first.

I didn't see Reke and Marcus playing off each other as much as you did I guess. I saw them competing for shots, with Cousins as well. I saw a reluctance from both to play inside out, or even give Cousins the ball on nights he was rolling. Maybe that will change after a training camp, or a more structured offense is implemented. I'm not sure. I'll let the powers that be decide.

I like Marcus a lot, and if Petrie and Westy decide they are our backcourt next season, I'm fine with it. Maybe I'm completely off point here, and after an offseason and full training camp, they'll mesh better both together and with the team, and they'll solidiy the backcourt for years to come. But I'm not completely confident they will, at least not the point we don't take an Irving if available, or even consider adding a point. With them I also see two young natural scorers, who want to make their mark in this league. Will they both be able to temper that enough to help the team? I don't know.

I'm nervous about having a starting backcourt where neither player looks comfortable running a team. Yes I do think Reke could get there, and he'll have the ball in his hands a lot no matter what. That's also why I'd never pair him with a Rubio/Rondo type, because they're both worthless off the ball. I've never been high on the idea of having two 20+pt scorers in the same backcourt, and even moreso with arguably a top 3 offensive center on the team, who's also arguably our best playmaker/creator at this point.

Its only my opinion, but down the road I think Reke will be best with the ball looking to score or create for others, with someone next to him who can hit the open shot, but doesn't require shots, and can create for himself or others when need be. I also think Marcus will be best in a role where he mostly looks to score. For both Marcus and Reke, their strength is scoring, and the more we try to turn them into creators, the more we take away from their strengths, and the more they look to score, the more they take away from Cousins.

Its not the same, but I'd compare it a little to OKC, with Harden, Durant, and Westbrook. Harden could start for them, and is a very good offensive player. But with him in the starting lineup, it might take away from what Durant/Westbrook do. Coming off the bench really allows Harden to play his game, and all 3 end up having a larger impact on the game. As Cousins/Reke mature, I see having another guy looking to score20+ in the starting lineup taking away from their games somewhat, whereas if Marcus comes off the bench, he can do what he does best, score, without affecting any chemistry between Reke and Cousins.

You made some good points, and I can see your point of view. Of course I don't necessarily agree with it, but thats what makes the world go round. I think that Reke averaging 20 plus points a game may take a hit with both Thornton and Cousins on the floor at the same time. But thats not necessarily a bad thing as long at the overall team scoring is still efficient. What I really liked about Thornton last season was his play off the ball, which I paid close attention to. He was the recepient of passes while cutting down the lane, and also backdoor cuts. When he didn't have the ball he was always trying to shake his man and get to an open spot.

There were games where he didn't take many shots in the first half, and then exploded in the second half. That tells me he's an opportunistic scorer, and most of the time trys to take what the other team is giving him. There were several games toward the end of the season where he was the focus of the other teams defense. He didn't try to force things, and instead made some very nice passes when he was overplayed. These are all things that for the most part, Tyreke doesn't do. I think he will in time, but up till now it hasn't been a part of his game. And, I think these are necessary qualities for whoever plays next to Tyreke in the backcourt.

Like you, its just my opinion, and if were better going a different route, then I'm on board. I guess we'll find out at some point. But first things first. Lets get the first pick in the draft. Then lets resign Thornton and Dalembert. After that, I'll leave it in Petrie's hands.