Kings 2009-2010 NBA Draft:

[Kingster]

Ok, let me rephrase this. Neither Bledsoe or Bradley would be the BPA in the top ten in my humble opinion. Nor would Whiteside. Udoh might be considered a small reach depending on whose doing the drafting. Now if your biggest need is for a big man, preferly a center, then I think you try to fill that need if you can justify the pick by saying that there really isn't anyone else available thats head and shoulders above him. If all things are close to equal and you have a chance to fill a need, you do so.

The strength of this draft is big men. To draft a combo guard like Bledsoe or Bradley over a good big man would be just plain stupid. Now if were talking about Turner or Wall, thats different. Maybe even Johnson, depending on which big man is available.

I also don't necessarily agree that a defensive center would clog up the middle. You could say the same thing about an offensive center that plays primarily in the post. You can still spread the floor. Granted if the defensive center doesn't have any type of outside shot to respect, its harder for him to draw the opposing center out. But once Tyreke's midrange shot comes around it won't make much difference one way or the other.

I agree on the first paragraph. Yes, if you're choosing among a bunch of guys with pretty much the same ability, then yes, go big. And I agree that if Turner of Wall is there we shouldn't go big. I also agree with much of your last paragraph. I really wonder how much better than Hawes are any of these big men, including Cousins. If we draft a big guy maybe his biggest impact is putting the fear of God in Hawes, and not necessarily his direct impact on the court. I guess that's all to the good.

 

[bajaden]

I agree on the first paragraph. Yes, if you're choosing among a bunch of guys with pretty much the same ability, then yes, go big. And I agree that if Turner of Wall is there we shouldn't go big. I also agree with much of your last paragraph. I really wonder how much better than Hawes are any of these big men, including Cousins. If we draft a big guy maybe his biggest impact is putting the fear of God in Hawes, and not necessarily his direct impact on the court. I guess that's all to the good.

Considering that Cousins is an entirely different kind of center than Hawes is, its sort of like comparing apples and oranges. They can both be good, just different. Sometimes its a matter of what fits your team the best. If nothing else it would be a complete change of the style of play. Cousins playes primarily in the post. He's a very physical player. He's a terrific rebounder. If you were to ask me which one has the best chance of being an allstar, I would pick Cousins. But I don't see any reason the two of them couldn't co-exist. Or, at times be on the floor at the same time. Probably a moot point unless the basketball god's smile upon Kingsland.

 

[bajaden]

Even lower than Vlade?

Well, I believe he was talking about bringing in potential draft picks. However the idea of him finishing below Vlade does tickle the ribs.

 

[rhythmless]

I didn't personally hear this. My son did, so if someone else did hear the interview and my son's interputation needs correcting, do so. But my son said he heard an interview by Koz of Jerry Reynolds. During the interview he asked Jerry about Rubio. Jerry said that when the Kings bring in players that there's a series of tests that their given to test their athleticism, strength, etc. He said that Rubio scored the lowest in the Kings history of giving the test. And after that he was never a consideration. So take that for what its worth. Hearsay!

...So you're saying that Petrie, our GM, responsible for bringing in specimens of elite athleticism such as Miller, Peja, Vlade, and soggy waffles, PASSED on Rubio because he was too slow/weak?

I'd love to be in the room when they were discussing Rubio...

GP: "I mean, the kid has great vision, but he's no Miller when it comes to lateral quickness."

Underling: "Miller, sir?"

GP: "Brad Miller, B52. Cornrows. Looks like he's crying when he doesn't get calls? Get with the program, underling."

 

[bajaden]

...So you're saying that Petrie, our GM, responsible for bringing in specimens of elite athleticism such as Miller, Peja, Vlade, and soggy waffles, PASSED on Rubio because he was too slow/weak?

I'd love to be in the room when they were discussing Rubio...

GP: "I mean, the kid has great vision, but he's no Miller when it comes to lateral quickness."

Underling: "Miller, sir?"

GP: "Brad Miller, B52. Cornrows. Looks like he's crying when he doesn't get calls? Get with the program, underling."

Not sure if your just trying to be amusing or not. Just so you know, I'm not a Rubio hater, as they say. Actually, I have no feelings about him one way or the other. I just thought what Reynolds said was interesting. Maybe you misunderstood my post.

First off, I said it was second hand knowledge from my son, so take that for what its worth. Secondly, I said the information suspossedly came from Jerry Reynolds and he was talking about potential draft picks. Such as Flynn, Jennings etc. Reynolds stated that they have regular testing that they give all potential draft picks, and its that group of tests that Rubio scored the lowest score in the history of them giving the test.

It had nothing to do with Brad Miller or Vlade or any other freeagent that they may have brought in. For all I know Reynolds may have been talking just about potential point guards or guards in general. As I said, it was second hand info. I would find it hard to believe that Rubio would score lower than Miller or Vlade. Maybe Peja, who was a better athlete than people game him credit for.

 

[Gilles]

...So you're saying that Petrie, our GM, responsible for bringing in specimens of elite athleticism such as Miller, Peja, Vlade, and soggy waffles, PASSED on Rubio because he was too slow/weak?

I'd love to be in the room when they were discussing Rubio...

GP: "I mean, the kid has great vision, but he's no Miller when it comes to lateral quickness."

Underling: "Miller, sir?"

GP: "Brad Miller, B52. Cornrows. Looks like he's crying when he doesn't get calls? Get with the program, underling."

While not always going with the toughest big Petrie do love power guards.

 

[Kingster]

Not sure if your just trying to be amusing or not. Just so you know, I'm not a Rubio hater, as they say. Actually, I have no feelings about him one way or the other. I just thought what Reynolds said was interesting. Maybe you misunderstood my post.

First off, I said it was second hand knowledge from my son, so take that for what its worth. Secondly, I said the information suspossedly came from Jerry Reynolds and he was talking about potential draft picks. Such as Flynn, Jennings etc. Reynolds stated that they have regular testing that they give all potential draft picks, and its that group of tests that Rubio scored the lowest score in the history of them giving the test.

It had nothing to do with Brad Miller or Vlade or any other freeagent that they may have brought in. For all I know Reynolds may have been talking just about potential point guards or guards in general. As I said, it was second hand info. I would find it hard to believe that Rubio would score lower than Miller or Vlade. Maybe Peja, who was a better athlete than people game him credit for.

I have a source extemely close to those who evaluate talent with the Kings. He likes Turner and Wall. That's it. Cousins isn't in the group. But unlike you, I won't reveal my source...

 

[hammystyle]

I have a source extemely close to those who evaluate talent with the Kings. He likes Turner and Wall. That's it. Cousins isn't in the group. But unlike you, I won't reveal my source...

Soooooo, did you ask him what happens if we don't get one of the top two picks?

 

[Vlade4GM]

I didn't personally hear this. My son did, so if someone else did hear the interview and my son's interputation needs correcting, do so. But my son said he heard an interview by Koz of Jerry Reynolds. During the interview he asked Jerry about Rubio. Jerry said that when the Kings bring in players that there's a series of tests that their given to test their athleticism, strength, etc. He said that Rubio scored the lowest in the Kings history of giving the test. And after that he was never a consideration. So take that for what its worth. Hearsay!

Well, it doesn't mean much to me without knowing what the tests are and who has been tested before. I've seen Rubio play plenty of times and I'm very confident given his skills, size, and untestable athletic traits, that he's going to be a very good PG in the NBA. Athletic tests can be a valuable tool, but nothing is more valuable than actually viewing players in a real 5-on-5 game.

 

[dbfish]

Well, it doesn't mean much to me without knowing what the tests are and who has been tested before. I've seen Rubio play plenty of times and I'm very confident given his skills, size, and untestable athletic traits, that he's going to be a very good PG in the NBA. Athletic tests can be a valuable tool, but nothing is more valuable than actually viewing players in a real 5-on-5 game.

It's also hard to get agood feel for how good Rubio would be when he refuses to work out with other potential point guards.

 

[rhythmless]

Not sure if your just trying to be amusing or not. Just so you know, I'm not a Rubio hater, as they say. Actually, I have no feelings about him one way or the other. I just thought what Reynolds said was interesting. Maybe you misunderstood my post.

Amusing, sir. Guess I missed the mark?

It was interesting, I enjoy hearing about what goes on in the backroom.

 

[bajaden]

I have a source extemely close to those who evaluate talent with the Kings. He likes Turner and Wall. That's it. Cousins isn't in the group. But unlike you, I won't reveal my source...

Kind of a no brainer me thinks. Somehow I just don't feel enlightened.

And my source was my son. But since no one knows who that is, I guess I'm not really revealing anything.

 

[bajaden]

Well, it doesn't mean much to me without knowing what the tests are and who has been tested before. I've seen Rubio play plenty of times and I'm very confident given his skills, size, and untestable athletic traits, that he's going to be a very good PG in the NBA. Athletic tests can be a valuable tool, but nothing is more valuable than actually viewing players in a real 5-on-5 game.

I'll see if I can get Jerry to give you his phone number..

 

[dbfish]

I know he's been injured but where do you think Ed Davis will land if he comes out?

 

[Vlade4GM]

It's also hard to get agood feel for how good Rubio would be when he refuses to work out with other potential point guards.

Not really. Those 1-on-1's and 3-on-3's are bias towards players like Flynn, Evans, and Jennings. Rubio is a 5-on-5 player and basketball is a 5-on-5 game.

 

[bajaden]

Not really. Those 1-on-1's and 3-on-3's are bias towards players like Flynn, Evans, and Jennings. Rubio is a 5-on-5 player and basketball is a 5-on-5 game.

I agree with what your saying to that extent. But you can evaluate some things from the drills. One on one defense. The ability to create your own shot in a one on one drill. Fast break drills, and some passing drills. I'm sure the teams would love to do five on five, but alas the rules don't allow it.

I think his point is not what info can be garnered from the drills, limited or not, but that Rubio refused to take part in the drills for a team that was rumored to be interested in drafting him.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I agree with what your saying to that extent. But you can evaluate some things from the drills. One on one defense. The ability to create your own shot in a one on one drill. Fast break drills, and some passing drills. I'm sure the teams would love to do five on five, but alas the rules don't allow it.

I think his point is not what info can be garnered from the drills, limited or not, but that Rubio refused to take part in the drills for a team that was rumored to be interested in drafting him.

That's not what it seemed like he was saying, but okay I totally give you that he was managed poorly. His agent probably felt that his long standing hype was going to prevent him from falling further than the 4th pick, but he was wrong. It got to a point where he probably should've done the drills because he burned bridges with Memphis and OKC early on, and Sac was weary of him, so he didn't have a whole lot to lose at that point. I think they screwed up by putting all their eggs in the Kings' basket. I think Memphis would've taken him had he shown no hesitation towards going there in the beginning.

Yes, those drills can still show parts about his game, but the problem is that most of those drills value skills that he's weak at. Add that to the fact that he had a longer layoff from competitive play than the others did and I understand where Rubio's camp was coming from. I'd expect that Bird and Stockton would not have done well in those drills either.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I know he's been injured but where do you think Ed Davis will land if he comes out?

This will be interesting. UNC is on TV all the time .. or was before the tournament started .. Ed Davis had plenty of chances to showcase his talent and he didnt.. MAYBE you'll see one real "wow" play from him a game .. but he just seems like the guy with the biggest bust potential in this draft .. I dont see what 'real' scouts supposedly see in him.

That being said, with his injurys AND when you take into consideration he didnt exactly light it up when he wasnt hurt, I think he could slide. ESPN still has him ranked really high. I think top 10 when I last checked, but if Davis stays in the draft, and he starts to slide .. Im thinking possibly to the twenties if a few guys move up after playing well in the tournament, hes another guy I wouldnt mind taking a chance on if we drafted a Center like cousins or Aldrich. Based on Davis's physical tools alone, he'd fit well next to a guy like Cousins.

I dont like Davis for a lottery pick, but if he slides and we trade for a pick in the twenties to draft him I'd be happy.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Ed Davis didn't really improve much from his freshman year. If I had to guess, I'd say he ends up being a Gooden/Haslem type player at best.

 

[dbfish]

Ed Davis= Bust? or Boom?

Thanks for all your input. I haven't seen a lot of Davis this year, but when I did I didn't see anything that would make me want to use a lottery pick on him. To me he's the real mystery man of this draft. Great tools but doesn't show them enough. I don't see what ESPN is all fired up about him.
Note to Petrie: Please don't draft him.

 

[bajaden]

Thanks for all your input. I haven't seen a lot of Davis this year, but when I did I didn't see anything that would make me want to use a lottery pick on him. To me he's the real mystery man of this draft. Great tools but doesn't show them enough. I don't see what ESPN is all fired up about him.
Note to Petrie: Please don't draft him.

Here's the deal. Davis played behind Hansbrough and when he got a chance to get on the floor he showed flashes of being a good player. This year was his year to shine, and he blew it. I can't think of any other way to put it. In fairness to him, North Carolina lost a lot of talent and was an entirely different team. Besides Hansbrough, they lost Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington, and Danny Green. Sometimes its a lot easier to shine when you have other good players around you. Thats what he had as a freshman.

I think the best thing he could do is go back to college and regroup. He was suspossed to carry the load this year and he wasn't up to it. Lets put it this way. He's far from being a Blake Griffin.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Here's the deal. Davis played behind Hansbrough and when he got a chance to get on the floor he showed flashes of being a good player. This year was his year to shine, and he blew it. I can't think of any other way to put it. In fairness to him, North Carolina lost a lot of talent and was an entirely different team. Besides Hansbrough, they lost Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington, and Danny Green. Sometimes its a lot easier to shine when you have other good players around you. Thats what he had as a freshman.

I think the best thing he could do is go back to college and regroup. He was suspossed to carry the load this year and he wasn't up to it. Lets put it this way. He's far from being a Blake Griffin.

They're gonna have Harrison Barnes next year too, so they could bring him more attention.

 

[hammystyle]

Here's the deal. Davis played behind Hansbrough and when he got a chance to get on the floor he showed flashes of being a good player. This year was his year to shine, and he blew it. I can't think of any other way to put it. In fairness to him, North Carolina lost a lot of talent and was an entirely different team. Besides Hansbrough, they lost Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington, and Danny Green. Sometimes its a lot easier to shine when you have other good players around you. Thats what he had as a freshman.

I think the best thing he could do is go back to college and regroup. He was suspossed to carry the load this year and he wasn't up to it. Lets put it this way. He's far from being a Blake Griffin.

Really? I think he's just catching a bad rap because of how bad the team was, but he was clearly the bright spot. If He scored a lot more, and did it more efficiently. He blocked shots at a higher rate and fouled less. The rebounding rate went down slightly, but its still top notch. He also had the Derrick Favors syndrome, sharing inside touches with inferior players and getting really bad guard play. He probly had it worse than Favors.

I don't know what expectations were, but he improved across the board. He's not a star player. His role in the league is to be a very good defender and rebounder and efficient inside scorer. A good team player who knows how to play. That's extremely valuable. My only question with him is measurements. He's got a very nice wingspan, but he'll always be skinny. If he's 6'10+, he can make that work in the league. If he's 6'9" it really puts a cap on what he can do.

 

[Kingster]

Soooooo, did you ask him what happens if we don't get one of the top two picks?

We just trudge along. Just like when we got Thompson and Hawes.

 

[Sarunas]

Ed Davis didn't really improve much from his freshman year. If I had to guess, I'd say he ends up being a Gooden/Haslem type player at best.

Totally agree with hammystyle here. I have to say I do like Ed Davis. Especially if we are in the 6-8 spot. I would take him over Monroe or Aldrich. I think why he did not show improvement, and a huge part of his disappointing season (aside from injury) was UNC's lack of a competent PG. Last year he showed amazing flashes of brilliance, well, that is because UNC had a PG who could feed him the ball, and actually look up for a lob pass for an alley-oop, or similar finish. Favors experienced the same kind of neglect. When you have Larry Drew III running the point, your bigs will suffer, and so Davis and Thompson both saw their numbers dwindle. Henson was also supposed to be a breakout player in the ACC, and that did not happen. Is the talent/size/athleticism there? Yes. Potential there? Yes. I think if you take Ed Davis and put him in the spot of Cole Aldrich on Kansas or in the spot of Greg Monroe on G'town, his numbers would surpass those of both guys (assuming he is clear of injury). Just my assessment.

I agree with everyone that he had a disappointing season, no one can deny that, but I think there were other big factors that played into this. I love his potential and he fits a need for us. Either way, I think if were drafting 1-6ish, we go BPA, anything after that go for need or trade the pick. Sounds like that is somewhat the consensus.

 

[Gilles]

Totally agree with hammystyle here. I have to say I do like Ed Davis. Especially if we are in the 6-8 spot. I would take him over Monroe or Aldrich. I think why he did not show improvement, and a huge part of his disappointing season (aside from injury) was UNC's lack of a competent PG. Last year he showed amazing flashes of brilliance, well, that is because UNC had a PG who could feed him the ball, and actually look up for a lob pass for an alley-oop, or similar finish.
I agree with everyone that he had a disappointing season, no one can deny that, but I think there were other big factors that played into this. I love his potential and he fits a need for us. Either way, I think if were drafting 1-6ish, we go BPA, anything after that go for need or trade the pick. Sounds like that is somewhat the consensus.

It's not about offensive production. Coming into the summer everybody knew he has to bulk up to be a good NBA big man. I guess he knew that too. In the fall he had the same body so you start to wonder what his body would look like in 5 years. Will he change significantly cause right now his body resembles that of NBA backups?

 

[Dime Dropper]

Is it wrong that I'd actually prefer Evans to Wall? I mean, I've seen Kentucky more than any other team by quite some distance, and while I'd love to have Wall or Cousins, I just think Turner is the better player now. I mean, Wall might have more potential long-term, but I'm not even convinced of that. Wall is a truly tremendous prospect, but so is Turner. I think Turner would be a better fit next to 'Reke.

Wall is a pure point but he can't shoot. In fact, in the 5-8 games I've seen him in, he's just as bad a shooter as Tyreke. Turner isn't a 3 point bomber but he's got a good mid-range game. He's an all rounder and he's unselfish. He really knows when to make the extra pass. I also think he's a very under-rated athlete. He's got an explosive first step and he can jump better than you would think. He really reminds me of Wade. Maybe not as good an athlete, but same type of game. I can see Turner being a legit star in a few years. I don't think his potential is limited at all.

Wall, while putting up beastly numbers, just doesn't seem to play as well as his stats indicate. Of course that might be a moot point considering that he is a fantastic prospect. You can see that he has all the tools to be a star. I'd be ecstatic with him, obviously, but I'd still prefer Turner. A backcourt of Turner and Evans would be a mismatch for the opposition every single night. Not many teams can say that.

Cousins would be a great fit. If he ever sorts his head out he can be a perennial All-Star at the Center position. That's how good I think he could be. Great size, strength, good post game, good defender, long, decent athlete.

Of course, this is all probably irrelevant as they are probably the top 3 prospects and we likely won't have a shot at any of those guys. Just some of my thoughts on those guys.

Bajaden, you clearly watch alot of college ball and have a vast knowledge of the game, what's your opinion on Wall/Turner? Just curious. That goes for you too, Gilles, and anyone else who wants to chip in.

 

[=LarryLegend=]

2010 will be a good draft, but did you guys see Enes Kanter is going to Kentucy??? That dude is going to beast next year. We was the Euro champ mvp he had 18.9pts 16.4rebs. Will be crazy if Bledsoe says to show his point skills next season.

 

[Sarunas]

It's not about offensive production. Coming into the summer everybody knew he has to bulk up to be a good NBA big man. I guess he knew that too. In the fall he had the same body so you start to wonder what his body would look like in 5 years. Will he change significantly cause right now his body resembles that of NBA backups?

Definitely Agree, but he is a 20 year old kid. And when you're a 6'10'' kid, putting on lean size with a frame that tall isn't the easiest thing to do unless you're a genetic freak ala Dwight Howard.

I'd rank the bigs
1)Favors
2)Cousins
3)Davis
4)Aldrich

 

[Vlade4GM]

If Wall had better advanced ball handling skills, then I'd say you can't pass on him, but the truth is that he doesn't. Which makes his ceiling a little harder to reach since advanced ball handling skills are not easily improved upon. It's not going to stop him from possibly being a very good PG, but perhaps less creativity than the true elites at the position. His shot isn't very good right now, but if we're going to compare him to Tyreke, then I'd say Wall has much better potential with his shot than Evans does since he has much better mechanics.

Just thinking about the unlikely hypothetical that if we did get the #1 pick, sometimes I think it's crazy to pass on Wall's upside. On the other hand though, Turner is a much safer pick, better fit with Evans, and has pretty good potential in his own right. I lean towards Turner.