John Henson the best fit next to Cousins?
- Thread starter BMiller52
- Start date
Then Davis can't put more than 15 pounds on his frame and proceeds to be rich man's Brandan Wright. There's at least half a dozen guys who could easily have better career than Davis. Davis' impact is not in place already. It's projected. He's a clear #1 pick but he's not a clear #1 TALENT. Everybody has question marks. Drummond put 7.6 rebounds and 2.7 blocks in 28 minutes. You say he somewhat lacked in rebounding. I counter with only his defensive rebounding (6 offensive rebounds per in 3 games against 2nd best team in the country anchored by defensive-minded middle of the first round big) looks suspicious but he played PF half the time due to having Oriakhi on his team and was further away from the basket than Oden for example who was parked middle of the paint. So you put him at C full time and all of sudden his stats are 9 rpg+3.4 bpg and he looks every bit like most dominant big men looked as freshmen. And his only 4 months older than Dwight Howard when he entered the draft. Also people forgot quickly when Oriakhi and Drummond were both on the floor it was Oriakhi every time who got the ball posting up. Did freshman Cousins took the back seat to junior Patterson in Kentucky? There's certainly more reasons to his anemic offense than lack of skills - distractions like coach's illness and his eventual taking leave or his very possible displeasure after deciding to come to UConn and being fifth or sixth player in the pecking order - and for a guy who doesn't give a damn he still posted solid defensive numbers.
Last edited:
It's really meaningless to me what he thinks because they all think that now. They all think they're KG and Amare, and it bothers the hell out of me. All these bigs care about now is the prestige of playing out on the perimeter. They want the ease of jacking up jump shots and straight drives to the basket, getting to the foul line. That's all the game is now, jump shots and bulldozing to the basket and getting to the foul line. There's no pride in playing in the post anymore, these players are worried about whether they're going to be household names and sell shoes, not winning games. Regardless of whether he even does have a hidden perimeter game, I guarantee you it is nothing like Durant's.
<end rant>
<end rant>
So let me get this straight, you would not draft this kid despite him being one of the most talented in the draft because he is not old school and is a gen Y guy who sees himself playing facing the basket?!
If we used that at the consideration come draft time we would pass on the pick every year and would not have selected Cousins either.
If we used that at the consideration come draft time we would pass on the pick every year and would not have selected Cousins either.
It's not an argument against drafting him, but it certainly doesn't do him any favors, just like I don't think that attitude did Cousins any favors, he succeeded despite it. And there's a slight difference between seeing yourself playing a face-up game and comparing yourself to Kevin Durant when you're not even remotely like him.
I just took the opportunity to rant about post players now. I don't think it's just about a different style of play, but an attitude that values flash over substance. Do you have a problem with that?
I just took the opportunity to rant about post players now. I don't think it's just about a different style of play, but an attitude that values flash over substance. Do you have a problem with that?
Last edited:
I think this whole Durant thing is a much ado about nothing thing. Found the interview where he referenced Durant, and first, very nice interview. Sounds a lot smarter than he is given credit for. And 2nd, the Durant reference comes about 5:40 second into the interview, and while the question is muddled, it sounds like a question about who he idolized or liked to watch growing up. And he said Durant (which again of course reminds you how ridiculously young these guys are -- Durant's 23 
).
At no point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
).At no point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this whole Durant thing is a much ado about nothing thing. Found the interview where he referenced Durant, and first, very nice interview. Sounds a lot smarter than he is given credit for. And 2nd, the Durant reference comes about 5:40 second into the interview, and while the question is muddled, it sounds like a question about who he idolized or liked to watch growing up. And he said Durant (which again of course reminds you how ridiculously young these guys are -- Durant's 23 ).
At not point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
).At not point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
Last edited by a moderator:
To be honest, I would probably pick Drummond even if MKG was available only because IMHO Drummond has a superstar potential while MKG is more of the ultimate glue guy and a much safer bet! In 5 years time I might have some egg on my face but I don't think I could pass up on Drummond's potential!
At the very least if he turns out to be a defensive big that anchors our defence for a decade, I walk away extremely happy knowing full well that we have Cousins and his big running partner!
At the very least if he turns out to be a defensive big that anchors our defence for a decade, I walk away extremely happy knowing full well that we have Cousins and his big running partner!
I don't know ... we've been trying for years to fill that SF spot ever since we traded Artest. I don't see many young defensive, team-first wing players in the league nowadays, other than Leonard who is probably going to stay on the Spurs for another good 5 years minimum. One of the only other guys I can think of is Chandler Parsons. All the defensive SFs are either older veterans who won't sign with us (say Battier or Artest) or younger more talented players who will cost a bomb (Iggy, Josh Smith). On the other hand, it's much easier to find young athletic shotblockers who will actually sign with us for the money.
On top of that, finally solving our SF problems would force Smart to show his true colours and let us see how he really plans to use Evans, what offense he runs etc. I personally feel that our team is not in dire need of a superstar. We've got two players we can build around, now it's time to surround them with a good system and good role players.
On top of that, finally solving our SF problems would force Smart to show his true colours and let us see how he really plans to use Evans, what offense he runs etc. I personally feel that our team is not in dire need of a superstar. We've got two players we can build around, now it's time to surround them with a good system and good role players.
You have to be prepared for all circumstances. We might trade down, or some of the players in the lower half of the first round, might slide into the top of the second round. We might make a deal for another first round pick in the middle of the round. Plus, just because a bunch of pundits decide that certain players are slotted in certain positions, doesn't mean you have to agree with them.
I think this whole Durant thing is a much ado about nothing thing. Found the interview where he referenced Durant, and first, very nice interview. Sounds a lot smarter than he is given credit for. And 2nd, the Durant reference comes about 5:40 second into the interview, and while the question is muddled, it sounds like a question about who he idolized or liked to watch growing up. And he said Durant (which again of course reminds you how ridiculously young these guys are -- Durant's 23 ).
At no point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
).At no point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
I think this whole Durant thing is a much ado about nothing thing. Found the interview where he referenced Durant, and first, very nice interview. Sounds a lot smarter than he is given credit for. And 2nd, the Durant reference comes about 5:40 second into the interview, and while the question is muddled, it sounds like a question about who he idolized or liked to watch growing up. And he said Durant (which again of course reminds you how ridiculously young these guys are -- Durant's 23 ).
At no point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
).At no point did he say that he thought he himself played like Kevin Durant:
Drummond's statement wasn't said at the Chicago combine.
Drummond said this during a work-out a week or two ago and was reported by one of the combine commentators (I'm going to guess Chad Ford but it could have been Fran Fraschilla, but I don't know since the camera wasn't on them when this was discussed) who spoke to Drummond at this earlier work-out.
Everyone should know my position on Drummond by now (Potential perfect fit for Kings, extremely high risk/high reward player who could bust out, with incredibly disappointing single season in College), so since I watched all of the combine I thought I should mention this particular conversation which took place for those who might have been unable to watch the combine.
You can take the comment however you'd like.
At the end of the day if Drummond is taken over Beal, Barnes, or Robinson I'll trust that it will work out because Petrie believes enough in this kid to pass on more 'sure thing' prospects.
As I recently wrote a note that I thought he wanted to play away from the basket, more like a PF, note he said he wanted to show people he could put the ball on the floor and that he has a 15 ft jumpshot. I feel a lot better about him. He had no opportunities lke that in college. There is something interesting about having two 270 pound stars on your team. It would force Smart's hand as I doubt he could play small ball. It also might scare the crap out of some defenses AND offenses. I want him or MKG. Drummond may be a superstar but MKG may bring your team to an NBA championship. We don't hand out superstar labels unless a guy scores or rebounds. Just being great is not adequate and that's a shame.
I want him or MKG. Drummond may be a superstar but MKG may bring your team to an NBA championship. We don't hand out superstar labels unless a guy scores or rebounds. Just being great is not adequate and that's a shame.
I don't know, personally I'm not so high on Henson. Anyways, if Petrie sees something and fells in love with him, I suppose we should trade down. Would you do something like this:
5th + Salmons to Detroit
9th + Prince to Sacramento
Why for DET? They get the #5 of course, and they dump a long term contract.
Why for SAC? We finally get a real SF, a veteran player, who can play good D and hit some 3s. He has 3 years left on his contract ($21,8 million), but we trade Salmons' contract (2 years, $15,6 million), so we basically add 6 millions over the next 3 years for a player who could be much more useful than Salmons.
5th + Salmons to Detroit
9th + Prince to Sacramento
Why for DET? They get the #5 of course, and they dump a long term contract.
Why for SAC? We finally get a real SF, a veteran player, who can play good D and hit some 3s. He has 3 years left on his contract ($21,8 million), but we trade Salmons' contract (2 years, $15,6 million), so we basically add 6 millions over the next 3 years for a player who could be much more useful than Salmons.
Its strange. I watch college basketball all year, and as a result, I draw conclusions about every player. And I feel fairly solid about my opinions. Up until the draft draws near, most people pay little attention to college basketball unless they're like me, or Unci03, and some others that have no life. So here's the strange part. People, some of which admit to not having seen most of these players play, are suddenly giving their opinion on who the Kings should pick. And in some strange osmosis way, I find myself being influenced by them.
I find myself saying, that maybe this Drummond guy won't be so bad. That maybe he'll actually turn into a great player. So here I'am denying everything that I saw during the year. Drummond is the perfect bait and switch. The perfect seductress to lead you over the cliff, and make you happy while he does it. He'll show you just enough to always make you think, next year will be the year. And four years from now, when you've finally had enough, Some other team will be seduced into thinking, just one more year.
So here's where I'm at! If Petrie picks him, and I don't think he will, then I'll be on board, and pray for the best. I'll sincerely hope I'm wrong. But from my prespective, if the choice is Drummond or MKG, I'm taking MKG. If the choice is Drummond or Beal, I'm taking Beal. If the choice is Drummond or Robinson, I'm taking Robinson. And if the choice is Drummond or Barnes, I'm taking Barnes. So yes, I'm playing it safe. I know in my heart of hearts that all of those guys are going to be good players. A couple may even be stars. I don't know that about Drummond, as a matter of fact, everything I saw this past season tells me he'll be the opposite.
Now I hate to condemn a player based on a few highschool games and one college season, so there is a point where I'm ready to take a risk. So if I have to choose between Henson and Drummond, then I'm taking Drummond. Of course that choice isn't likely to happen. I have to go with my notes, memory, and gut. I have to go with everything I saw this past season. Drummond isn't the second coming of Cousins. Too different attitudes and personalities. I have no malice toward him. He seems like a nice kid, so I wish him well. And if for some reason we choose him, I hope I've never been more wrong.
I find myself saying, that maybe this Drummond guy won't be so bad. That maybe he'll actually turn into a great player. So here I'am denying everything that I saw during the year. Drummond is the perfect bait and switch. The perfect seductress to lead you over the cliff, and make you happy while he does it. He'll show you just enough to always make you think, next year will be the year. And four years from now, when you've finally had enough, Some other team will be seduced into thinking, just one more year.
So here's where I'm at! If Petrie picks him, and I don't think he will, then I'll be on board, and pray for the best. I'll sincerely hope I'm wrong. But from my prespective, if the choice is Drummond or MKG, I'm taking MKG. If the choice is Drummond or Beal, I'm taking Beal. If the choice is Drummond or Robinson, I'm taking Robinson. And if the choice is Drummond or Barnes, I'm taking Barnes. So yes, I'm playing it safe. I know in my heart of hearts that all of those guys are going to be good players. A couple may even be stars. I don't know that about Drummond, as a matter of fact, everything I saw this past season tells me he'll be the opposite.
Now I hate to condemn a player based on a few highschool games and one college season, so there is a point where I'm ready to take a risk. So if I have to choose between Henson and Drummond, then I'm taking Drummond. Of course that choice isn't likely to happen. I have to go with my notes, memory, and gut. I have to go with everything I saw this past season. Drummond isn't the second coming of Cousins. Too different attitudes and personalities. I have no malice toward him. He seems like a nice kid, so I wish him well. And if for some reason we choose him, I hope I've never been more wrong.
College ball is a seductress, but like most seductresses not everything she is selling is real. Of course you, and any good college ball watcher, is going to be sure that guys who did well in college are going to do well in the pros, because as an avid college watcher you just got done watching them do well all season long. You're used to them doing well. Used to thinking of them as stars.
But it goes without saying the pros are a different level, and college competence does not always directly translate. Many a college star has turned out to be nothing in the NBA. Many a lesser college player has been able to carve out a lengthy NBA career simply because they have the size and body for it, so their own game does not degrade from the crossover the way the games of college sized guys do. And of course its a rampantly inexcat science predicting how it will work out. If it was easy there would be no draft busts, and it wouldn't be much fun.
You absolutely know these guys' games better than I or most people do. I only start making prognosticating noises once they start approaching the NBA level, where I know the requirments and history far better than I do the NCAA. You get a guy like Drummond, he's kind of the classic "built for the pros" type of player, so I get interested. Somebody shows me a 6'2" shooting guard or a 6'6" big man, and my interest dwindles. Rapidly.
Last edited:
