Kings like Lillard according to Hoops World

[Section 101]

Umm ... if anything Pop has one of the most strict rotations. He left Ginobili coming off the bench and continued starting Danny Green right until they were desperate to get some wins against OKC.

Look, I can agree with you that you can play around with playing time when it comes to role players. Danny Green/Gary Neal/Mills or Splitter/Bonner can get different minutes every night, but you can be damn sure that Ginobili and Parker are going to get their minutes, regardless of "who's got it going". And in our context, you're talking about Tyreke Evans (former ROY and possible franchise cornerstone), Marcus Thornton (our main FA "acquisition" last off season), Isaiah Thomas (starting PG last season, getting 30 minutes a night) and Lillard (#5 pick over one of MKG, Barnes, Robinson, Beal, Drummond) to share an inconsistent split of 96 minutes a game??? And that's before we even talk about Jimmer, our 2011 first round pick, who frankly I don't think the organisation has given up on just yet.

Yes, he keeps players in their roles, but he is constantly putting guys in an out the line ups. People around here would ***** that players aren't able to get into a flow. He gives the older players the max rest he can by pulling them before timeouts etc.

How is splitting 96 mins a game between 4 players inconsistent?

Like I said, Jimmer is the odd man out right now unless he has improved his ball handling to a point where he can actually run the team. Few rookies get over 24 mins a game. I could see Lillard over Drummond or Barnes or them moving back a few spots too.

 

[Kingster]

I disagree. Yes, drafting for need or fit is the quickest way to make a mistake in the draft. But I don't think there's any burning need to move a guy right away. You draft the most talented guy available and sort it out later. The Thunder drafted Harden while already having Sefolosha, Durant and Green on the wings. And then traded Green for Perkins to both fill a need AND clear room for Harden to get PT.

The Suns drafted Steve Nash AND traded for Jason Kidd while having (an albeit injury prone) Kevin Johnson already on the team. And Nash sat in Phoenix for two years before being traded for the pick that became Shawn Marion.

Look at the buzz around Batum who has not justified the hype that surrounds him (or PDX's unwillingness to deal him) with on court production. Drafting the better player will get you a better trade chip regardless of whether other teams think you have a log jam or not, so long as your GM is patient and competent.

Let's put it this way. I want them to draft the best player, period, regardless of fit or need or whether they still have redundant players at that position. But I would prefer in the best possible world that if they draft a player of the redundant positions that they would have trades already lined up. If they don't have the trades lined up, I'm not going to forego drafting the best player. So, if for example, Beal is there and they think he's the best player and they have no trades at the 2-guard lined up, I'd still pull the trigger on Beal, regardless of the logjam at that position.

 

[Kingster]

Waaaay back in March, Arby's Roast Beef had Lillard at the top of his pg list. It would be nice to get a scouting report from him and baja on Lillard.

 

[bajaden]

I don't think Lillard will make a good PG.. Now this is just my opinion because most of us have not seen him play much, if at all. Other than highlights and reading the fan forums and such from what I gather he's more of a MT than an IT.

I don't know.. It's that same funny feeling I got when watching Reke at Memphis when I read about Lillard and watch his highlights. I don't think he's going to be a good PG.

I have seen Lillard play, but not a lot. But in what I saw, he appeared to be more of a shooting guard than a point guard. Now to be fair to him, he was in a similar situation as Fredette, where he was the main guy on offense, and was asked to carry most of the load. So its possible that he has the abilitites, but just wasn't allowed to showcase them. Now I saw almost every game Fredette played his last season, and I saw more in the way of true PG instincts in him than I did Lillard. But once again, I only saw Lillard play 2 or 3 times. So its a poor comparison.

However, as Jamal and some others have suggested, it doesn't make much sense to draft Lillard unless some other moves are going to be made. If we were to amnesty Salmons and then also make a trade that included lets say both Jimmer and Thornton, then I could see drafting Lillard. And I just throw the names out there at random. Put in whoever you want. Otherwise it makes no sense, unless its part of a trade down with a team that really wants Lillard, but is picking from a position where they don't think he'll be available. We make their pick for them at 5, and they give us an asset, and pick who we want at whatever position they're at. Very similar to the what happened last year with Jimmer.

But to remain status quo, would be ridiculous.

I. Thomas PG
M. Thornton SG
T. EVans SG/PG
J. Fredette PG/SG
F. Garcia SG/SF
J. Salmons SG/SF
T. Williams SG/SF ( if resigned as many want)
T, Honeycutt SF
T. Outlaw SF

Thats nine players dividing up 144 minutes. If equal, that would be 16 minutes a piece. of course we all know thats not how it works. Tyreke will get his 30 plus, as will Thornton. That would leave around 80 minutes left for the remaining seven players, without adding a Lillard, who is potentially a second coming of Jimmer with more athleticism. So without some other moves, it doesn't make any sense.

 

[Gilles]

Another gem from this credible organisation: link to nba rumors

Answering

If the Bobcats pass on Thomas Robinson, there’s a good chance he falls to the Kings at #5. In this scenario, could the Sixers swing a deal for Robinson using Iggy and their pick as bait?

Steve Kyler

I think you’ll see some trade up to grab him, but yes he could be there at #5… not sure that’s where the Kings are going. From what I have heard they are either going Drummond at #5 and moving Cousins to the four spot… or they will go Damian Lillard and solve their point guard problem.

The Kings like Isiah Thomas but do not view him as a starting guard on a winning team… they seem to be conceding that Jimmer isn’t going to be the guy either. Tyreke has fallen out of favor so they need a starting point and loved Damian.

I think they;d have to consider T Rob, but I really don’t think he’ll be there when the Kings draft.

 

[Kingster]

I have seen Lillard play, but not a lot. But in what I saw, he appeared to be more of a shooting guard than a point guard. Now to be fair to him, he was in a similar situation as Fredette, where he was the main guy on offense, and was asked to carry most of the load. So its possible that he has the abilitites, but just wasn't allowed to showcase them. Now I saw almost every game Fredette played his last season, and I saw more in the way of true PG instincts in him than I did Lillard. But once again, I only saw Lillard play 2 or 3 times. So its a poor comparison.

However, as Jamal and some others have suggested, it doesn't make much sense to draft Lillard unless some other moves are going to be made. If we were to amnesty Salmons and then also make a trade that included lets say both Jimmer and Thornton, then I could see drafting Lillard. And I just throw the names out there at random. Put in whoever you want. Otherwise it makes no sense, unless its part of a trade down with a team that really wants Lillard, but is picking from a position where they don't think he'll be available. We make their pick for them at 5, and they give us an asset, and pick who we want at whatever position they're at. Very similar to the what happened last year with Jimmer.

But to remain status quo, would be ridiculous.

I. Thomas PG
M. Thornton SG
T. EVans SG/PG
J. Fredette PG/SG
F. Garcia SG/SF
J. Salmons SG/SF
T. Williams SG/SF ( if resigned as many want)
T, Honeycutt SF
T. Outlaw SF

Thats nine players dividing up 144 minutes. If equal, that would be 16 minutes a piece. of course we all know thats not how it works. Tyreke will get his 30 plus, as will Thornton. That would leave around 80 minutes left for the remaining seven players, without adding a Lillard, who is potentially a second coming of Jimmer with more athleticism. So without some other moves, it doesn't make any sense.

I'm just wondering if this Lillard talk is coming up as a fall-back scenario for the Kings. If MKG and Robinson are gone, they might have Lillard as the next best player on their board, above Barnes and Drummond. I can easily see MKG or Lillard having a domino effect on the Kings regarding trades (Thornton/Tyreke/Jimmer/IT), but there's probably a pretty high likelihood of trades anyway, so what the heck...

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm just wondering if this Lillard talk is coming up as a fall-back scenario for the Kings. If MKG and Robinson are gone, they might have Lillard as the next best player on their board, above Barnes and Drummond. I can easily see MKG or Lillard having a domino effect on the Kings regarding trades (Thornton/Tyreke/Jimmer/IT), but there's probably a pretty high likelihood of trades anyway, so what the heck...

Given the number of teams trying to trade up, and given that we did not get ot work out any of the Top 5, outside of Drummond, and given that the few "name players" we did have in for workouts seemed very big man/shotblocker oriented, except for Lillard...makes you wonder if this time the trade back for a vet and a lower pick strategy might not be in place. We do our diligence, bring in the top bigs/shotblcokers to see if there is somethign there we don't want to miss. If not, then we retreat and are looking for a steal later in the draft.

 

[roasthawg]

Given the number of teams trying to trade up, and given that we did not get ot work out any of the Top 5, outside of Drummond, and given that the few "name players" we did have in for workouts seemed very big man/shotblocker oriented, except for Lillard...makes you wonder if this time the trade back for a vet and a lower pick strategy might not be in place. We do our diligence, bring in the top bigs/shotblcokers to see if there is somethign there we don't want to miss. If not, then we retreat and are looking for a steal later in the draft.

A trade definitely seems likely if analyzing the players we brought into workout is the criteria... only problem is outside of a Barnes' workout for the Raptors none of the other top 5 guys worked out for anyone below us. So unless Barnes is there at #5 (not looking highly probable at this point) and we're working a trade with Toronto then it seems just as likely that we are going to take whoever falls to us at #5 and were just bringing in everyone else that intrigued us to do our dilligence.

 

[beb0p]

http://aroyalpain.com/2012/06/20/sa...ans&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

If we pick another combo guard I think I'll kick myself in the face, ugh.

IMO, just old fashion scare tactic by the Kings. Would not surprise me if GP's crew is spreading this rumor. Portland needs a PG and Lillard is the best one (according to mocks) there, and supposedly likes him. Enter the Kings, drafting one spot ahead of Portland, saying hey we like Lillard too (wink), trade #6 + something for our #5 and you'll get your man!

Memphis tried this in 2009 - picking one spot ahead of Oaklahoma, the Grizz started saying how much they liked James Harden (about a week before the draft). The Thunder called their bluff, and I expect Portland will as well.

 

[roasthawg]

IMO, just old fashion scare tactic by the Kings. Would not surprise me if GP's crew is spreading this rumor. Portland needs a PG and Lillard is the best one (according to mocks) there. Enter the Kings, drafting one spot ahead of Portland, saying hey we like Lillard too (wink), trade #6 + cash for our #5 and you'll get your man!

Memphis tried this in 2009 - picking one spot ahead of Oaklahoma, the Grizz started saying how much they liked James Harden (about a week before the draft). The Thunder called their bluff, and I expect Portland will as well.

Good call... I think you're right.

 

[rainmaker]

Another gem from this credible organisation: link to nba rumors

Answering
I think you’ll see some trade up to grab him, but yes he could be there at #5… not sure that’s where the Kings are going. From what I have heard they are either going Drummond at #5 and moving Cousins to the four spot… or they will go Damian Lillard and solve their point guard problem.

The Kings like Isiah Thomas but do not view him as a starting guard on a winning team… they seem to be conceding that Jimmer isn’t going to be the guy either. Tyreke has fallen out of favor so they need a starting point and loved Damian.

I think they;d have to consider T Rob, but I really don’t think he’ll be there when the Kings draft.Steve Kyler

Interesting, if true. One, it would mean we're intentionally playing down Drummond, and think Cuz is mobile enough to play the 4.

Two, it really brings into the question the ROY campaign if the FO already does not see IT as a starting PG. If true, they why the hell not have let Reke continue the improvment at point under Smart for the season, and then make a decision?

Three, it would seem we're looking to move Reke to SG, pair him with a PG who's not on the roster(I'd go after Lowry), in which case I'd say Petrie is shopping MT.

Which would mean the structure Petrie wants looks like

PG: x____
SG: Reke
SF: x____
PF: Cousins
C: Drummond(or another shotblocker)

this would have us heading in the right direction

But, it's just a rumor....

 

[roasthawg]

Interesting, if true. One, it would mean we're intentionally playing down Drummond, and think Cuz is mobile enough to play the 4.

Two, it really brings into the question the ROY campaign if the FO already does not see IT as a starting PG. If true, they why the hell not have let Reke continue the improvment at point under Smart for the season, and then make a decision?

Three, it would seem we're looking to move Reke to SG, pair him with a PG who's not on the roster(I'd go after Lowry), in which case I'd say Petrie is shopping MT.

Which would mean the structure Petrie wants looks like

PG: x____
SG: Reke
SF: x____
PF: Cousins
C: Drummond(or another shotblocker)

this would have us heading in the right direction

But, it's just a rumor....

Could also be that they're looking to move Reke and keep Thornton. From that little piece you could just as easily have come up with this:

PG: Lillard
SG: Thornton
SF: ??
PF: ??
C: Cousins

 

[Nighthawk1]

Could also be that they're looking to move Reke and keep Thornton. From that little piece you could just as easily have come up with this:

PG: Lillard
SG: Thornton
SF: ??
PF: ??
C: Cousins

I must say I prefer Rain's take better, although you're correct in how you could perceive the article!

 

[KingsCitizen]

I must say I prefer Rain's take better, although you're correct in how you could perceive the article!

Conditions that could have us drafting Lillard would be.
1.) Thornton moving to bench or being shift and Reke as SG
2.) One of IT or Jimmer being package
3.) 1 and 2 and we get either a big or a legit SF.
4.) Maloofs going gaga over Lillard

 

[mac]

Conditions that could have us drafting Lillard would be.
1.) Thornton moving to bench or being shift and Reke as SG
2.) One of IT or Jimmer being package
3.) 1 and 2 and we get either a big or a legit SF.
4.) Maloofs going gaga over Lillard

5.) Smart wants to have a real starting line up of IT/Jimmer/Lillard/Thornton/Tyreke

 

[gatoradeSD]

5.) Smart wants to have a real starting line up of IT/Jimmer/Lillard/Thornton/Tyreke

lol wouldnt doubt it

 

[Gilles]

Hey, that team can handle the ball, probably even 5 balls.

 

[Kingster]

Given the number of teams trying to trade up, and given that we did not get ot work out any of the Top 5, outside of Drummond, and given that the few "name players" we did have in for workouts seemed very big man/shotblocker oriented, except for Lillard...makes you wonder if this time the trade back for a vet and a lower pick strategy might not be in place. We do our diligence, bring in the top bigs/shotblcokers to see if there is somethign there we don't want to miss. If not, then we retreat and are looking for a steal later in the draft.

A trade could be in the works. There are some other things to consider: 1) Lillard has moved way up on some draft boards; just behind the top 5 on one board; 2) this is a weak pg draft per the experts; 3) this appears to be a strong upcoming FA group in point guards. Frankly, I don't know how all the dots connect at this point. Just have to wait to see what happens in the draft and whether it becomes clear.

 

[mac]

A trade could be in the works. There are some other things to consider: 1) Lillard has moved way up on some draft boards; just behind the top 5 on one board; 2) this is a weak pg draft per the experts; 3) this appears to be a strong upcoming FA group in point guards. Frankly, I don't know how all the dots connect at this point. Just have to wait to see what happens in the draft and whether it becomes clear.

Unfortunately I think that's really all that can be said for now. It's going to be an interesting (or absolutely depressing) draft day 2012.

 

[Glenn]

It is fortunate that the only player absolutely necessary to work out was Drummond.

 

[bajaden]

Interesting, if true. One, it would mean we're intentionally playing down Drummond, and think Cuz is mobile enough to play the 4.

Two, it really brings into the question the ROY campaign if the FO already does not see IT as a starting PG. If true, they why the hell not have let Reke continue the improvment at point under Smart for the season, and then make a decision?

Three, it would seem we're looking to move Reke to SG, pair him with a PG who's not on the roster(I'd go after Lowry), in which case I'd say Petrie is shopping MT.

Which would mean the structure Petrie wants looks like

PG: x____
SG: Reke
SF: x____
PF: Cousins
C: Drummond(or another shotblocker)

this would have us heading in the right direction

But, it's just a rumor....

What I question, aside from the whole article, is why would you move Cuz to PF when Drummond is the more mobile of the two, and while at UCONN, looked very unconfortable playing with his back to the basket. Its like trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

 

[funkykingston]

What I question, aside from the whole article, is why would you move Cuz to PF when Drummond is the more mobile of the two, and while at UCONN, looked very unconfortable playing with his back to the basket. Its like trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

Much like when DMC was paired with Dalembert, I don't think it matters what you label each guy. Cousins will spend more time in the low blocks and with the ball in his hands in general on offense and be the guy to guard opposing post players that want to bang while Drummond would focus on the 15 ft jumper, running the floor and scoring on putbacks on offense and play the role of weakside help defender as well as guarding more mobile PFs on offense.

So technically I'd label Cousins as the center but it doesn't really matter either way.

 

[cuad]

I would put Drummond at C because he'd be the defensive anchor and the guy jumping at tip-off. He could guard whoever. Anyway, I love Lillard's interviews and his game. I think he's that special, tbh.

 

[bajaden]

A trade could be in the works. There are some other things to consider: 1) Lillard has moved way up on some draft boards; just behind the top 5 on one board; 2) this is a weak pg draft per the experts; 3) this appears to be a strong upcoming FA group in point guards. Frankly, I don't know how all the dots connect at this point. Just have to wait to see what happens in the draft and whether it becomes clear.

I just don't get the Lillard thing. As I said, I only saw him play 2 or 3 times, and in those games, he didn't show me anything to make me think he was a guy that could run an NBA team from a PG point of view. He can score, and like Jimmer, comes from a lesser conference. I will give him this, he's a much better defender in college than Jimmer was. He handles the ball well, and he hardly turns the ball over. He's also very good at getting to the basket, and the foul line. But I actually didn't see him enough to pass any kind of judgement.

The Kings have said they see Jimmer as a future PG, and certainly IT is a PG. So to my mind, drafting Lillard doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you really think he's that special. Hell, what do I know?

 

[Uncia03]

I just don't get the Lillard thing. As I said, I only saw him play 2 or 3 times, and in those games, he didn't show me anything to make me think he was a guy that could run an NBA team from a PG point of view. He can score, and like Jimmer, comes from a lesser conference. I will give him this, he's a much better defender in college than Jimmer was. He handles the ball well, and he hardly turns the ball over. He's also very good at getting to the basket, and the foul line. But I actually didn't see him enough to pass any kind of judgement.

The Kings have said they see Jimmer as a future PG, and certainly IT is a PG. So to my mind, drafting Lillard doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you really think he's that special. Hell, what do I know?

Lillard is really difficult for me as I didn't see him play a single game last season, so I have no basis in which to judge him.

I do know that coming into the Combine people were already starting to talk about him as the best PG prospect on the board ahead of Marshall, and he participated in the drills the 1st day and looked good, and did well with the athletic measurements so....his draft is rising even more based on the good Combine participation.

But it will be a real head-scratcher for me if he's drafted, as I don't know much of anything about him and will have to rely completely on other people's opinions regarding his game till I can get a first hand look in Vegas.

 

[Section 101]

I just don't get the Lillard thing. As I said, I only saw him play 2 or 3 times, and in those games, he didn't show me anything to make me think he was a guy that could run an NBA team from a PG point of view. He can score, and like Jimmer, comes from a lesser conference. I will give him this, he's a much better defender in college than Jimmer was. He handles the ball well, and he hardly turns the ball over. He's also very good at getting to the basket, and the foul line. But I actually didn't see him enough to pass any kind of judgement.

The Kings have said they see Jimmer as a future PG, and certainly IT is a PG. So to my mind, drafting Lillard doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you really think he's that special. Hell, what do I know?

The one thing that keeps coming up with Lillard is that he is a leader. One big area the Kings are lacking.

 

[roasthawg]

I just don't get the Lillard thing. As I said, I only saw him play 2 or 3 times, and in those games, he didn't show me anything to make me think he was a guy that could run an NBA team from a PG point of view. He can score, and like Jimmer, comes from a lesser conference. I will give him this, he's a much better defender in college than Jimmer was. He handles the ball well, and he hardly turns the ball over. He's also very good at getting to the basket, and the foul line. But I actually didn't see him enough to pass any kind of judgement.

The Kings have said they see Jimmer as a future PG, and certainly IT is a PG. So to my mind, drafting Lillard doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you really think he's that special. Hell, what do I know?

If they like Jimmer then they LOVE Lillard. That's the way I see it. Lillard is a more athletic Jimmer... his game might translate a little more smoothly to the NBA. A pg that can shoot and get to the rack should never be out of consideration unless you already have a Chris Paul on your roster... I guess that's what it is here.

 

[Uk kings fan]

http://www.oregonlive.com/nba/index.ssf/2012/06/2012_nba_draft_jared_sullinger.html

maybe out the top 10...

 

[JB_kings]

If they like Jimmer then they LOVE Lillard. That's the way I see it. Lillard is a more athletic Jimmer... his game might translate a little more smoothly to the NBA. A pg that can shoot and get to the rack should never be out of consideration unless you already have a Chris Paul on your roster... I guess that's what it is here.

The scary part is that Jimmer is probably better at passing and setting up teammates.

 

[Uncia03]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Sullinger fall out of the top 10.

I was luke-warm on Sullinger coming into his 2nd year especially since he wouldn't be a good fit next to Cousins.
He actually lost weight, which you think would be good, but I felt that the loss of mass actually hurt his ability to move people around in the post.

He just lacks the explosiveness he'll need to be able to dominate the paint at the NBA level, and with the hurt back, will probably end up outside the top 10.

But no way he falls out of the 1st round, and there will be great pressure for the GMs picking 15 or later to consider him, especially if they need a post presence. For example, he'd be a fantastic pick-up for the Thunder because if you pair him with great perimeter players and a shot-blocker, it will give him a lot more room to operate in the post.