KINGS PICKING 4TH IN 2022 NBA DRAFT!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
There are glass-half-empty ways to look at it, and glass-half-full ways to look at it. Going back to the 2000 draft (which seems far enough) there have been 102 players selected who have gone on to be All-Stars. Obviously there are going to be a few more yet to come from the most recent drafts, but that's about 5 All-Stars available in an average draft. Of those guys, 29 were selected in the first three picks, while 72 were available at the #4 pick. That means that in an average draft about 1.5 All-Stars are selected in the first three picks, and there are about 3.5 All-Stars remaining in the pool at #4. They're there. You just have to find them.
Yes, not all All-Stars are the same caliber, and this is why the first-pass expectation is that Smith/Banchero/Holmgren will go top three, because the expectation is that they're the most likely to become great. Still, we get our pick of everybody else, and history shows that there will be good players available. Maybe it's as easy as taking Sharpe, or Ivey, or Murray. Maybe we should dig a bit deeper into the Mathurin/Davis/Griffin tier, or go outside the box with Duren or Dieng or Daniels. Maybe it's Agbaji who's the next superstar. The great thing is, we don't have to take guys who are mocked in the #4 range at #4, we can identify the next stud and take them no matter where they are mocked. The next stud will be there - in fact probably at least 3 or 4 of them. Hopefully we can trust Monte to identify that stud and take him.
Yes, not all All-Stars are the same caliber, and this is why the first-pass expectation is that Smith/Banchero/Holmgren will go top three, because the expectation is that they're the most likely to become great. Still, we get our pick of everybody else, and history shows that there will be good players available. Maybe it's as easy as taking Sharpe, or Ivey, or Murray. Maybe we should dig a bit deeper into the Mathurin/Davis/Griffin tier, or go outside the box with Duren or Dieng or Daniels. Maybe it's Agbaji who's the next superstar. The great thing is, we don't have to take guys who are mocked in the #4 range at #4, we can identify the next stud and take them no matter where they are mocked. The next stud will be there - in fact probably at least 3 or 4 of them. Hopefully we can trust Monte to identify that stud and take him.
Last edited:
Granted, all of that is true but there also significant misses with picks 1-3 as well. I get what you mean, but to just about dismiss the 4th pick altogether seems super pessimistic. There are plenty of picks after #4 that came to be super significant players, 2 of which have won the last 4 MVPs. Some of that is luck, other is player development from the staff and some of it is up to the players themselves. Kobe was 13th, Larry Bird 6th, D-Wade was 5th…
I am not trying to prove the 4th pick is a golden ticket or anything, but one can confidently say there is plenty of history of absolutely great and even best of all time players taken at 4 or later.
I am not trying to prove the 4th pick is a golden ticket or anything, but one can confidently say there is plenty of history of absolutely great and even best of all time players taken at 4 or later.
I remember reading here or even StR back in the day people questioning his athleticism and him playing euro league vs ncaa. I don’t remember a particular scout or analyst specifically but from most of his detractors, those were the question marks that might people had from him becoming a superstar. Of course they were wrong but hindsight is 20/20. (Keep in mind, as proven by @kb02 my memory isn’t the greatest 
)
)
I think it was like 99/1 in favor of drafting Luka. Both here and on other Kings fan forum sites. Unfortunately. Brandon “Spida” Williams was in that 1% category, but happened to be in a decision making position. Dude deserves to never work in an NBA front office again.
Yeah, OKC doesn't "need" the picks, but I think it depends where Ivey or Sharpe are on their board. If he's their #2 prospect, why not trade down to 4 and get like at minimum a top 5 protected Kings FRP? With how big a disaster this franchise has historically been, could be a great bet and you get the guy you want anyway.
The thing that concerns me is that every time I saw him play he seemed to be falling down a lot for no apparent reason. Hopefully, it was due to something like his shoes being crap. Other than that, he seems similar to Fox with a better outside shot at 36% in his soph year vs. Fox's 24% in freshman yr .
My concern with Ivey Is if his Fox level defense holds true. If it does you have one of the worst starting defensive backcourts in the league. If his offense is a level better than Fox, you are stuck trying to trade a max contract with very little leverage. Basically the only way this works out is if his defense is league average and he is a plus offensive player. That is a possibility
That's only half the story though.
Morant's AST% was 51.8% while Ivey's was 19.2%.
Morant had an AST/TO of almost exactly 2:1 and Ivey was just under 1.2:1.
As a whole the numbers tell me the same thing the eye test did - Ivey is more of a scoring guard and not a lead guard, at least at this stage. That may allow him to fit better alongside Fox as a SG vs another PG, but I think it may also limit his star potential.
Big, blazingly fast and athletic PGs have MVP potential. Derrick Rose, Ja Morant, Russell Westbrook, maybe even pre-injury John Wall.
But slightly undersized, super athletic SGs are a different story. That puts Ivey more into the Victor Oladipo, Zach LaVine, Donovan Mitchell mold.
That's still potentially a valuable player, but maybe not a franchise changer. I wouldn't be upset if Ivey were the pick. You'd want a great shooter to round out the starting five and some additional bench shooting as well, but that's a backcourt that will attack the basket for sure.
Morant's AST% was 51.8% while Ivey's was 19.2%.
Morant had an AST/TO of almost exactly 2:1 and Ivey was just under 1.2:1.
As a whole the numbers tell me the same thing the eye test did - Ivey is more of a scoring guard and not a lead guard, at least at this stage. That may allow him to fit better alongside Fox as a SG vs another PG, but I think it may also limit his star potential.
Big, blazingly fast and athletic PGs have MVP potential. Derrick Rose, Ja Morant, Russell Westbrook, maybe even pre-injury John Wall.
But slightly undersized, super athletic SGs are a different story. That puts Ivey more into the Victor Oladipo, Zach LaVine, Donovan Mitchell mold.
That's still potentially a valuable player, but maybe not a franchise changer. I wouldn't be upset if Ivey were the pick. You'd want a great shooter to round out the starting five and some additional bench shooting as well, but that's a backcourt that will attack the basket for sure.
That might be Mathurin? Klay is an inch taller but in every other measurable (wingspan, standing reach, weight, hand size) they're almost identical. And both guys flew under the radar because they played in the Pac 12 and were shunted into the "future role-player" category because of their perceived limitations as defenders and ballhandlers.
Because they aren't close to the same type of players in both positive and negative ways. Look at that Ivey scouting report. He's entirely different. The Kings tried to put a passing PG like Haliburton next to Fox more than once, this isn't a PG, Ivey is a SG with potential to run an offense. It's even right there in his college numbers. He's got no middle game right now, but guess where Fox lives? No crossover there either.
I remember reading here or even StR back in the day people questioning his athleticism and him playing euro league vs ncaa. I don’t remember a particular scout or analyst specifically but from most of his detractors, those were the question marks that might people had from him becoming a superstar. Of course they were wrong but hindsight is 20/20. (Keep in mind, as proven by @kb02 my memory isn’t the greatest )
)
And it's not like there weren't Luka fans like me that gave Marvin a chance. I really did. I even saw what the Marvin people saw early in that first season. BUT HE NEVER GREW. ugggh.
Of course they do. Every attempted pass is a chance for a turnover.
You can't point to Ivey having a lower turnover percentage than Morant as a point in his favor without also acknowledging that he passed the ball far less often.
On the general premise (that Ivey takes care of the ball fairly well despite moving faster than almost anyone else with the basketball) I agree. But he played a very different style than Morant.
You can't point to Ivey having a lower turnover percentage than Morant as a point in his favor without also acknowledging that he passed the ball far less often.
On the general premise (that Ivey takes care of the ball fairly well despite moving faster than almost anyone else with the basketball) I agree. But he played a very different style than Morant.
- Status