I can think of two reasons: his outside shooting (NBA range) and his superior athleticism. He would compliment Tyreke's game really well. Plus, he is an outstanding rebounder for his position SG/SF.
I like him or Aldrich in the 6-10 range. Aldrich is less flashy, but he is a defensive presence, can run the floor, and doesn't need the ball on offense to be effective (sets great screens and is a good offensive rebounder). Another guy who would compliment Tyreke.
I'm sure he'll be a good player. He's really more of a 3 than a 2. He'd need to be the clear best prospect available to take him over the number of solid bigs in the top 10. At this point I see no reason why he's a better prospect than the 2nd tier bigs like Monroe, Aldrich, or Whiteside.
I think Aldrich is the best choice at the spot we will be picking....Kings need rebounding and shot blocking.....I am going out on a limb and going to say that Aldrich could be a poor mans Tim Duncan......plus he boxes out EVERY time a shot goes up....Spence could use a coach on the floor like him out there.....Plus, I feel Cousins is too young and immature and could end up being the next Kwame Brown...
The thing about Johnson defensively is he's palying in zone defense which meansFact is, Johnson needs someone to create for him if he's going to put up the points. I mean, he's talented and aggressive off the ball enough where he can pick up the scrapper points, but ultimately he's an off-ball player like Marion that needs to be fed by a playmaker. I think that will cause him to be overlooked come draft time because teams like to dream a little when they're picking that high, instead of perhaps being a little more realistic and realize that players that can fill in all the gaps on a team (like Johnson) might be the best player available. He'll be a SF offensively, but he can play both the 2 and 3 defensively, so if a team has a ball handling 3 then he can fit in.
The thing about Johnson defensively is he's palying in zone defense which means
a) it's hard to evaluate his man defense,
b) he's getting more help D stats than he would have with man D.
He should be better than above average but will he be an excellent defender? 'Cause that's what required from roleplayer in top-10.
The thing about Johnson defensively is he's palying in zone defense which means
a) it's hard to evaluate his man defense,
b) he's getting more help D stats than he would have with man D.
He should be better than above average but will he be an excellent defender? 'Cause that's what required from roleplayer in top-10.
Yeah, I would agree with this. Thats the problem with any player that comes out of Syracuse. He is a very good athlete so one would think that it would translate into being a good defender. But alas, we know from experience that it doesn't always happen that way. I like Johnson, but the only perimiter players that I'm going to get excited about are Wall and Turner. My hope is that someone else gets excited about Johnson and that drops a big into our laps.
Now with the regular college season over, what is your opinion on Udoh. I've personally been surprised by his all around play. He's been better than I expected, and I don't see a lot of glaring holes in his game. Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm surprised he's not higher on the boards.
I'm betting that most people don't see a whole lot of upside in Udoh. Probably seen as the Jason Thompson of this draft.
I'm betting that most people don't see a whole lot of upside in Udoh. Probably seen as the Jason Thompson of this draft.
Obviously I cant speak for everyone, but I dont think thats true at all ( about the upside thing ). I like his potential, and I think he has a lot of it. Obviously Im not saying thats what hes going to be, but he does remind me of a raw Garnett. Very athletic, good defender, and an offensive skill set that can improve. He doesnt have KG's personality, which has a lot to do with how good Garnett was in his prime, but as far as what both guys can do on the floor, Udoh reminds me of him.
Obviously I cant speak for everyone, but I dont think thats true at all ( about the upside thing ). I like his potential, and I think he has a lot of it. Obviously Im not saying thats what hes going to be, but he does remind me of a raw Garnett. Very athletic, good defender, and an offensive skill set that can improve. He doesnt have KG's personality, which has a lot to do with how good Garnett was in his prime, but as far as what both guys can do on the floor, Udoh reminds me of him.
I'm sure he'll fit right in with the Kings. I say this because I noticed he is shooting 47% from the line.I'm not sure why that would be. He's an entirely different player than Jason. Different body type and longer. I would even say that he's more athletic than Jason, but that could be a toss up. But there's no doubt that he comes in with a resume of being a shot blocker. I liked Jason coming out of college, and I still think he will develop into a fine player. But I think Udoh plays with more composure than Jason did coming out of college. He seldom gets rattled and appears to have a good basketball IQ.
I know he transfered out of Michigan I believe, because he didn't like the way he fit into Princeton offense. The irony of that, is that the way he plays would fit very well into the Princeton offense. So I'm not sure what the rub was.
I'm sure he'll fit right in with the Kings. I say this because I noticed he is shooting 47% from the line.![]()
Just one more player for the free throw camp the Kings should hold before the start of the season.![]()
I'm not saying it's fair, but rather a perception now that 18 and 19 year olds have become the norm. 22/23 year olds are going to be seen as having little upside.
Part of his age problem is because he transfered from I believe Michigan to Baylor and had to redshirt for a year.
But I think its a shame that people have that perception. There are an awfull lot of players in the HOF that were 22 years of age when they came into the NBA. And many of them played for 14 or 15 years. Although the norm is closer to 11 or 12 years. You had the real exceptions like Malone and Stockton who played close to 20 years. But my point is that to say that because someone is 21 or 22 that they have no upside is just ridiculous. I'm not saying that you said that of course. I mean was Karl Malone a better player two or three years later than when he came into the league. How about Jordan? I think we can safely say that he got better. Larry Bird was 23 years old when he came into the league and he played 13 seasons.
I think if you scout a player all through college, and you see steady improvement from year to year, there's no reason to believe that impovement will stop just because he enters the NBA. By the same token. If you scout a player for four years of college and see very little improvement from year to year, I think I would steer clear of that player.
At this point they are pretty comparable in my mind right now but still there are obvious differences:So lets say the lottery luck finally smiles on the Kings and we end up with the 3rd pick.
Who would be a better prospect Cousins or Favors and if we end up with either of these could we say that we have our inside-outside all-star duo in Tyreke and Cousins/Favors?!
What I am trying to ask is, if we end up with Cousins or Favors, in 2-3 years time will we have the dynamic duo that a championship team can be built around?
Interesting thing: J.Givony believes that apparently Whiteside won't be eligible next year so he's in this draft for sure.
So lets say the lottery luck finally smiles on the Kings and we end up with the 3rd pick.
Who would be a better prospect Cousins or Favors and if we end up with either of these could we say that we have our inside-outside all-star duo in Tyreke and Cousins/Favors?!
What I am trying to ask is, if we end up with Cousins or Favors, in 2-3 years time will we have the dynamic duo that a championship team can be built around?
At this point they are pretty comparable in my mind right now but still there are obvious differences:
1. Cousins is bigger and looks like he will be strictly a C in the league. Favors will be a PF/C though right now with his size he's a PF.
2. Cousins is a better off. rebounder, they are a wash on the other end of the floor and Favors is a better defender especially on perimeter.
3. Cousins is more developed offensively though mainly he's still getting by on size in college. Couzins projects to be classic inside scorer with some perimeter skills. Favors is more of inside guy as well but he's bread and butter will most likely be beating his defender off the dribble. Favors seems to be a better finisher.
Cousins, no doubt in my mind.So lets say the lottery luck finally smiles on the Kings and we end up with the 3rd pick.
Who would be a better prospect Cousins or Favors and if we end up with either of these could we say that we have our inside-outside all-star duo in Tyreke and Cousins/Favors?!
What I am trying to ask is, if we end up with Cousins or Favors, in 2-3 years time will we have the dynamic duo that a championship team can be built around?