Kings and the draft (split from Vasquez thread)

The draft, at least the lottery, is meant as a trampouline, not something you wallow around in. You get bad, get your next stars, then spring back into the fray.

Alternately of course you can get bad, draft poorly, let the talent you do get walk, and turn into the ****ing L.A. Clippers pre Blake/Paul.
 
If you check ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU, you'll find that they broadcast a lot of highschool basketball games. And for the most part, they pick games with players that are generally ranked in the top 20. I generally DVR the games and watch them later. If you think thats stupid, then you can join my wife in that regard. I'll tell you up front, watching highschool basketball takes dedication, because a lot of it is downright terrible, and I won't even comment on the ref's.
I'll take your word for it: every time I turn to an ESPN channel, and there's not an NBA or WNBA game scheduled, they're talking about football, which leads me to immediately switch off from the aforementioned ESPN channel.

I'm not sure if your post is made in jest, or if you honestly want to know how I watch these games. I suspect that perhaps you doubt me. If so, I can stop wasting my time and find something better to do. If not, then I hope I've answered you question.
:: shrugs ::

My tone may have been facetious, because that's just how I roll, but my question was not in jest.
 
All the talk of the 2014 draft has reached a level of lunacy in my opinion. It's not even that good of a draft. The top 5 look to be very good, but we don't know yet as most of them haven't even played a college game. Plenty of guys disappoint in their rookie season -- Harrison Barnes and Shabazz Muhammad were the last two SF prospects projected as number 1 picks. Both looked "can't miss" out of high school and look where they ended up. There's a chance all of these guys hit at once and then the draft looks pretty stacked at the top, but even then, after the top 5 it's really not any better than a normal draft. How likely are we really to get a top 5 pick? You have to be seriously horrible to finish with one of the worst 3 records in the league and even that doesn't guarantee you a top 5 pick. We'd be lucky to draft somebody as good as Tyreke Evans in this upcoming draft. Like probably 1 in 20 lucky -- the lottery has to help us and then we have to correctly identify somebody who's going to develop into an All-Star talent and then we have to help them live up to that potential. I love college basketball and young players with potential are exciting to watch and root for but the thing is, we got damn lucky to land Tyreke Evans and to say that we would choose a chance at a lottery pick over keeping him at a market-rate deal (John Wall is supposedly negotiating a 5 year, 80 million dollar contract) is so wrong-headed I almost don't even want to bother discussing it.

Andrew Wiggins is probably going to be really good, probably. But what if he isn't? What if Jabari Parker wants to stay at Duke another year and Randle gets injured or has a poor season? Where are we at then? Do we tank the next season too? It's a never ending whirlpool and we've been stuck in it for years and what do we have to show for it? Spencer Hawes, Tyreke Evans, and Thomas Robinson are gone. Jimmer we can't give away. Thompson hasn't developed into anything but a borderline starter. We got 1 year of Patrick Patterson out of the Robinson deal and 1 year of Greivis Vasquez out of the Tyreke Evans deal. We could have bought these guys as free agents without having to suffer through horrible seasons first. Anybody who thinks that building through the draft is a rational business model at this point is either crazy or not paying attention if you ask me. Yes you can get lucky, but what successful business puts their future on the line for a lottery ticket? Not to mention, we've been so bad for so long that the fans completely gave up on the team and we still haven't had even one top 3 pick for that entire span. Not one. This is not going to change people. Sure, it might change, but I wouldn't bet on it. Let Cleveland have the 13th pick in the draft. Who cares? We just drafted a guy who most people thought was one of the three best players in the draft and we don't even know if he's a starter. Next year is really that much better that the 13th pick is going to be a difference between us becoming competitive or not? Really? Kendall Marshall, Markieff Morris, Ed Davis, Tyler Hansbrough, Brandon Rush, Julian Wright, Thabo Sefalosha, Sean May, Sebastian Telfair, Marcus Banks, Marcus Haislip? This is the deepest draft in over a decade? Okay.

while i happen to wholeheartedly agree with the general sentiment of this post, the ship sailed on ignoring next year's lottery the minute PDA agreed to sign-and-trade tyreke evans to new orleans for grievis vasquez. that was an undeniable talent bleed; the kings simply did not get equal value in return for evans, and unfortunately, outside of demarcus cousins, there's not enough talent anywhere else on this roster to rebuild it via trade. the most recent free agency cycle has also knocked some reality across the face of the new regime. there was talk of being aggressive. there was talk of being a major player. yet overpaying for carl landry was the best that they could do...

so that leaves the draft as the most likely place for the kings to land another impact player, either by selecting one outright, or by packaging the pick with spare parts in order to bring one back via trade, because even though the kings are short on the talent necessary to facilitate the kind of trade that brings back an impact player, a lottery pick is absolute gold under the new CBA. i maintain that, generally speaking, a high draft pick has more value as the hypothesis of all-star talent rather than as the actuality of the player selected with a given pick...

the draft is where desperate teams invest their hopes and prayers, after all, and the kings are as good an example as any when you consider how disproportionately enthusiastic the new regime was when they selected ben mclemore with the seventh pick. but from where i'm sitting, mclemore has a third option's ceiling, a klay thompson-lite who needs to figure out how to dribble at the nba level. i sure as **** hope he proves me wrong, but again, that's sort of my point: as a fan, i'm forced to hope that mclemore evolves into something special, because his limited skill set certainly doesn't qualify him as a "sure thing"...

regardless of what an individual thinks of tyreke evans, he was an impact player for the kings, a power guard with all-star potential and the kind of dynamic rim attack that can change the complexion of an entire game as defenses are forced to contend with one of the league's strongest and most efficient penetrators. while ben mclemore is an entirely different type of talent, he'll be lucky if he displays even half of evans' potential in his first few seasons. yes, tyreke evans is gone, and i'm not going to belabor the fact that i think it was a mistake to sign-and-trade him for vasquez, but because the kings didn't get value in return, they're still searching for a legitimate #2, with precious few avenues by which to bring one to sacramento...

heading into this offseason, i didn't think it would be the case, but as it turns out, next year's draft is an incredibly important one for the immediate future of this franchise. the kings may be able to sew up demarcus cousins on a contract extension, but i don't expect they'll be able to turn this team in the direction of the playoffs if they are unable to secure another impact player, and the 2014 draft is just about the only realistic opportunity with which to do so...
 
Last edited:
I think we have a fundamental difference in how we look at the draft. And that's fine! You see, I think the draft should be the life blood of a small market team. The Thunder is a perfect example of how a small market team builds through the draft. Look at the Spurs, and just about every core player they have, they acquired through the draft. I believe that you polish off the team, or fill the gaps through freeagency and trades. Of course you have to make good choices and that requires a good front office. Something we haven't had for while. Now maybe I'm misreading you because I haven't had the time to go through every post in this thread, but you seem to be making a connection between Tyreke leaving, and intentional tanking. I don't think that one has anything to do with the other.

Now that's just my opinion, and perhaps some will think that if we don't make the playoffs, it will be because we didn't resign Tyreke. Of course there's no way to prove that one way or the other. For instance, if by some miracle, we do make the playoffs, I'm not about to say its because we were smart enough to let Tyreke go. Neither premise can be proved. At this point, I think its a bit of a reach for anyone to think that a team, that hasn't been able to win 30 games for the last few years, is making intentional moves to tank the season. Hell, all they would have to do, is do nothing, and its almost a guarantee they'll miss the playoffs.

We can discuss the draft another time. But it is going to be a good one. Remember, no one thought we'd get Cousins or Tyreke. We missed out on players (Chandler Parsons) because someone didn't do their homework. Who thought IT would be as good as he turned out to be. There are very good players out there. You just have to put in the work.

Other people were making the connection between Tyreke leaving and tanking, as if to say it's fine that we lost some talent there because this draft is so good we're bound to get it back at the end of the year. That's what my comments were about. It's really not that simple. And for every team like OKC or San Antonio which hits on very very good prospects in the draft in consecutive years, there's 5 teams like Charlotte or Atlanta 5 years ago or Golden State for the last decade or so who make one bad decision after another and haven't been fortunate enough to win a high pick in a year that a transcendent talent like Kevin Durant or Tim Duncan is there to rescue the franchise. Atlanta scrapped together enough talent to make the playoffs every year without really being competitive and now they're back to square one. Golden State finally made some smart draft picks but then they also went out and got David Lee and Andrew Bogut and now Andre Igoudala. It's not impossible to build through the draft, but you have to be awfully lucky. You're at the mercy of pingpong balls, injuries, uneven talent distribution year to year, other GMs and scouting departments, and of course your own ability to judge talent. Only one of those factors do you have any control over.

And in our situation, you summed it up yourself. We've been terrible for years. Doing nothing does guarantee that we'll miss the playoffs, just like we have for the past 7 seasons. So why do nothing? Why let one of your best players leave because you're afraid to commit a fairly modest amount of guaranteed money, then make a few moves for midlevel players who's cap hit adds up to the exact same value? Which top free agents did we target? Calderon and Landry are the types of pieces you add to a winning team, not a terrible one. The Igoudala offer wasn't even on the table long enough to be considered a serious offer. It sounds like we were doing him a favor more than anything and had no real intention to sign him. I'm not bringing up the T word myself, but doesn't it seem pretty apparent that their intentions were not to make the team substantially better this off-season? Like every other off season in recent memory, opportunities were there to improve the team substantially and our front office mostly watched other teams take them. That's disappointing. The fact that this is our first impression of what this new front office plans to do may be cause for patience and considered optimism for some, but for me it only makes it more disappointing that we once again will remain a bottom feeder by choice for at least one more season.
 
I'll take your word for it: every time I turn to an ESPN channel, and there's not an NBA or WNBA game scheduled, they're talking about football, which leads me to immediately switch off from the aforementioned ESPN channel.


:: shrugs ::

My tone may have been facetious, because that's just how I roll, but my question was not in jest.

After going and checking a few of the games I still haven't watched, and what channel I recorded them on, I'll add CBS sports channel, and NBC sports channel. Both carry college and highschool basketball at times. If you take the time to constantly check the guide during basketball season, I think you'll be surprised how many highschool basketball games are televised. I also subscribe to the sports package, which includes all the Fox sports and comcast sports channels, as well as the Pac 12 sports channels, and Madison Square Garden sports channels. All those are for the most part college sports, but you can watch more college basketball than you'd ever want to see.

I'll give you a name. Write it down because you'll be hearing it a lot more in a couple of years. Doral Moore!
 
Last edited:
After going and checking a few of the games I still haven't watched, and what channel I recorded them on, I'll add CBS sports channel, and NBC sports channel. Both carry college and highschool basketball at times. If you take the time to constantly check the guide during basketball season, I think you'll be surprised how many highschool basketball games are televised. I also subscribe to the sports package, which includes all the Fox sports and comcast sports channels, as well as the Pac 12 sports channels, and Madison Square Garden sports channels. All those are for the most part college sports, but you can watch more college basketball than you'd ever want to see.
That may also explain it: I don't watch amateurs when the pros are playing.
 
I figured Glenn would watch high school girls, but not you. :p
That seems like a shot below the belt, and I don't know what sort of relationship you have with Glenn, if it's an in-joke between the two of you or not, but I'll advise to to resist the urge to go too far with "jokes" like that. Ephebophilia is hardly a laughing matter.

I'm not predisposed to watching high school anything, but it's not a secret to anyone on this message board that I am a big fan and supporter of women's basketball.
 
Last edited:

Baja don't lie! Kid is 7 feet:)

I might add that he's only 16 years old. At the recent Peach St. competition, he almost completely put a lid on the basket, blocking shot after shot. Naturally he's still raw offensively at 16, but he'll be one of the top center prospects in two years along with another 7 footer, Stephen Zimmerman.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That seems like a shot below the belt, and I don't know what sort of relationship you have with Glenn, if it's an in-joke between the two of you or not, but I'll advise to to resist the urge to go too far with "jokes" like that. Ephebophilia is hardly a laughing matter.

I'm not predisposed to watching high school anything, but it's not a secret to anyone on this message board that I am a big fan and supporter of women's basketball.

There is no secret joke so I don't know the point of this comment. Mr. Citrus well knows I am a fan of women's sports and although certain types of people may find this odd, I was a season ticket holder for the Monarchs.