If it's Ivey the clear #4 I think we need to trade Fox before we make the pick.
KINGS PICKING 4TH IN 2022 NBA DRAFT!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
And even disregarding the positional need for the Kings, what archetype is more valuable in today's league? a 6'4 guard that's probably not a full-time PG, or a 6'8 forward with range/weakside shotblocking that's perfectly suited to defend the 4 in the modern NBA and possibly some 3?
Yeah, or Davion. I just don't think Monte can afford to head into the season with the same guard glut problem as last year. DDV and Davion give you more versatility/skill on defense, but that's not an enviable position to try and fit all of them together and work in Ivey. You might get DDV asking out as well if we draft another high guard. There's no time to figure that out again, Sabonis is on UFA watch and if things go badly this year, Monte MAYBE has one more season to get to the season to the playoffs.
And yeah just draft BPA, blah, blah, but there has to be some semblance of how guys can fit together. Fox/Hali had tremendous success with Hali's shooting and secondary playmaking his rookie season before Hali delved into being a ball-dominant on-ball creator. Best case scenario with Ivey is we have 2 De'Aaron Foxes'... While super freaking fun, they'd be the worst defensive back-court in the league (with one of the weakest rim protection C's in the league), and just sketchy inconsistent shooting.
The Ja stuff is just a pipe-dream that gets pushed around because he looks like him. Not near the level of passer/handle and he's not Ja level of explosive either. Just below, but still matters when we're taking upside into account.
Dongoodboy
Bench
Just curious, will a Fox Ivey back court works?
Oh absolutely Ivey probably sours both Fox and DDV. Fox will be a wreck to start the season if we draft Ivey. Haliburton was supposed to be a 2 too, so I'm not buying this "not a PG" talk. No no no no no.
Now - I get that you don't not draft Luka over Fox, I am not sure Ivey is that level guy. Actually fairly sure he is not. If we really don't like Murray for some reason despite the obvious clean fit I'd much rather roll the dice on Sharpe. But why not just go with the perfect fit? But if somehow, someway they have decided Ivey is a Luka transcendent talent you move Fox and DDV before the start of the season.
I really hope this is just some Jackson level mental-swervery.
Don’t know and also curious. I get the idea Sharpe would complement Fox better if a guard is the direction we go. Also Sharpe should be able to switch to SF occasionally.
I really hope the Kings are open to taking a long look at him in workouts since so little to go on.
steelevt
All-Star
Hopefully to det or Indy for their pick + asset
Pimpis Zajoba
G-League
John Hollinger
Jaden Ivey | 6-4 sophomore | SG | Purdue
Ivey is the one player in this draft who is most reminiscent of Ja Morant, with a blast-off first step that sends him rocketing toward the rim. It should be even more effective in the open space of the NBA versus a Purdue approach that was heavily geared toward entering the ball to its two behemoth post players.
Alas, the Morant comparisons break down once we get into the decision-making realm. Ivey barely averaged more assists than turnovers in Big Ten play; his good clips are ridiculous, but there is a lot of head-scratching chaff to work through before you get to that wheat. His shooting is also a question mark, with a below-the-shoulder set shot similar to Morant’s that yielded 32.2 percent from 3 and 73.98 percent from the line in his two years with the Boilermakers. Put simply, Ivey is going to be an offensive skill-development challenge for whatever team picks him, but the upside reward is an All-Star-caliber shot creator from the guard spot.
Defensively it’s a similar story. The physical toolset is there, but the application of those tools is a bit inconsistent. Ivey can get caught upright and blown by at times but doesn’t concede space and can still stay with dribblers. Opponents rarely went at him in isolation, perhaps because of the giant dude waiting in the paint behind him, but also because it didn’t look profitable the few times opponents tried. Ivey can slide his feet and explodes off the floor to challenge shots, sometimes surprising shooters who thought they had themselves a nice pull-up.
He needs the defensive output to be more consistent, especially if he’s juggling a prominent offensive role at the same time. The tape from his freshman year is actually even better, perhaps because less was being asked of him at the other end.
Overall, this is an eye-test call. Ivey’s college track record is wartier than you’d prefer for a pick this high, especially from a sophomore, but nobody else in this draft is in Ivey’s league as an off-the-dribble creative force.
Jaden Ivey | 6-4 sophomore | SG | Purdue
Ivey is the one player in this draft who is most reminiscent of Ja Morant, with a blast-off first step that sends him rocketing toward the rim. It should be even more effective in the open space of the NBA versus a Purdue approach that was heavily geared toward entering the ball to its two behemoth post players.
Alas, the Morant comparisons break down once we get into the decision-making realm. Ivey barely averaged more assists than turnovers in Big Ten play; his good clips are ridiculous, but there is a lot of head-scratching chaff to work through before you get to that wheat. His shooting is also a question mark, with a below-the-shoulder set shot similar to Morant’s that yielded 32.2 percent from 3 and 73.98 percent from the line in his two years with the Boilermakers. Put simply, Ivey is going to be an offensive skill-development challenge for whatever team picks him, but the upside reward is an All-Star-caliber shot creator from the guard spot.
Defensively it’s a similar story. The physical toolset is there, but the application of those tools is a bit inconsistent. Ivey can get caught upright and blown by at times but doesn’t concede space and can still stay with dribblers. Opponents rarely went at him in isolation, perhaps because of the giant dude waiting in the paint behind him, but also because it didn’t look profitable the few times opponents tried. Ivey can slide his feet and explodes off the floor to challenge shots, sometimes surprising shooters who thought they had themselves a nice pull-up.
He needs the defensive output to be more consistent, especially if he’s juggling a prominent offensive role at the same time. The tape from his freshman year is actually even better, perhaps because less was being asked of him at the other end.
Overall, this is an eye-test call. Ivey’s college track record is wartier than you’d prefer for a pick this high, especially from a sophomore, but nobody else in this draft is in Ivey’s league as an off-the-dribble creative force.
Pimpis Zajoba
G-League
Shaedon Sharpe | 6-6 freshman | SG/SF | Kentucky
Teams have a lot of questions about Sharpe, questions that aren’t going to get answered by seeing him work out against a chair in Chicago at the combine. Why didn’t he play at all for Kentucky this year? How much did that set him back?
While teams comb through background parts and go back through his EYBL tape, the inevitably of the upside scenarios is what’s likely to see him chosen high. He could fail spectacularly, but the bar for this player archetype is pretty low as far as eventual success goes. Sharpe is 6-6 with a 6-11 wingspan and can really shoot; watching him work out on the floor before Kentucky’s NCAA Tournament game, I found it pretty clear he’ll be a viable NBA floor spacer from Day 1.
He’s also athletic enough that he was ranked as the top prospect in the Class of 2023 before reclassifying. How many guys like that, who also had elite shooting ability, have failed? Yes, there are questions about his feel and other, secondary lines of inquiry given that nobody has seen him play top-drawer competition. If he were a center or point guard, I’d have him several places lower. But a 6-6 wing who can shoot? Even if he “fails” in terms of achieving stardom, that still becomes a decent value proposition.
Teams have a lot of questions about Sharpe, questions that aren’t going to get answered by seeing him work out against a chair in Chicago at the combine. Why didn’t he play at all for Kentucky this year? How much did that set him back?
While teams comb through background parts and go back through his EYBL tape, the inevitably of the upside scenarios is what’s likely to see him chosen high. He could fail spectacularly, but the bar for this player archetype is pretty low as far as eventual success goes. Sharpe is 6-6 with a 6-11 wingspan and can really shoot; watching him work out on the floor before Kentucky’s NCAA Tournament game, I found it pretty clear he’ll be a viable NBA floor spacer from Day 1.
He’s also athletic enough that he was ranked as the top prospect in the Class of 2023 before reclassifying. How many guys like that, who also had elite shooting ability, have failed? Yes, there are questions about his feel and other, secondary lines of inquiry given that nobody has seen him play top-drawer competition. If he were a center or point guard, I’d have him several places lower. But a 6-6 wing who can shoot? Even if he “fails” in terms of achieving stardom, that still becomes a decent value proposition.
Pimpis Zajoba
G-League
Keegan Murray | 6-8 sophomore | SF/PF | Iowa
Murray is probably the most head-scratching player in this draft. On the one hand, he’s a 6-8 forward who put up video-game stats in the Big Ten. Don’t overthink this, right? But on the other hand, he was a much older player (turning 22 in August, he’s the second-oldest player on my list today), and his tape isn’t quite as alluring as his stats. Murray is neither a high-wire athlete nor a knockdown shooter. He’s fine and all — 37.3 percent from 3 and 74.9 percent from the line in two years at Iowa — but it’s his all-around wiles as a scorer that provide his real value.
It’s fair to question how much daylight that part of his game will receive at the NBA level, because he doesn’t create easy separation and isn’t a great distributor.
Defensively, it’s more of the same. His size and length help him get hands on balls, but he’s not some elite stopper out there. He offers some secondary rim protection but didn’t always show great awareness, and his team’s defense was consistently its undoing. Murray has long arms and can slide his feet on the ball, so he should hold up decently enough against wings and fours.
What I get back to is that we’ve seen this movie before with guys like T.J. Warren and Cedric Ceballos — smooth forwards who lacked top-drawer athleticism but had crazy feel for scoring and finding buckets in the flow of the game. The league undervalues guys like this sometimes because they don’t have an easy box to slide into, but I’m pretty confident Murray can be a rotation forward at worst, and the upside is a 20-point scorer.
Murray is probably the most head-scratching player in this draft. On the one hand, he’s a 6-8 forward who put up video-game stats in the Big Ten. Don’t overthink this, right? But on the other hand, he was a much older player (turning 22 in August, he’s the second-oldest player on my list today), and his tape isn’t quite as alluring as his stats. Murray is neither a high-wire athlete nor a knockdown shooter. He’s fine and all — 37.3 percent from 3 and 74.9 percent from the line in two years at Iowa — but it’s his all-around wiles as a scorer that provide his real value.
It’s fair to question how much daylight that part of his game will receive at the NBA level, because he doesn’t create easy separation and isn’t a great distributor.
Defensively, it’s more of the same. His size and length help him get hands on balls, but he’s not some elite stopper out there. He offers some secondary rim protection but didn’t always show great awareness, and his team’s defense was consistently its undoing. Murray has long arms and can slide his feet on the ball, so he should hold up decently enough against wings and fours.
What I get back to is that we’ve seen this movie before with guys like T.J. Warren and Cedric Ceballos — smooth forwards who lacked top-drawer athleticism but had crazy feel for scoring and finding buckets in the flow of the game. The league undervalues guys like this sometimes because they don’t have an easy box to slide into, but I’m pretty confident Murray can be a rotation forward at worst, and the upside is a 20-point scorer.
sactowndog
All-Star
Does this not sound exactly like Fox?
sactowndog
All-Star
To whom? We tried to trade Fox instead of Haliburton and no one wants him on the max contract Monte gave him. A sub par defender with a inconsistent outside shot is not max value.
kb02
All-Star
Missing the highlighted part from Vecenie: Ivey’s main issues are his non-existent midrange game and sub-elite passing skills, both essential skills for an NBA lead guard. If he can’t improve those areas, it will be hard for him to take on a primary offensive role consistently. But if those parts of Ivey’s game come together, he could end up as the best player in this class.
Fox and Ivey are both sub-elite passers for lead guards. I would also add sub-elite vision (which overlaps a ton with passing).
https://sports.yahoo.com/nba-mock-draft-2022-experts-232052553.html?src=rss
EIM86
Starter
this is exactly what I saw for the 2 separate halves of basketball I watched Murray play. It doesn’t look like his game will translate to a star at NBA level. He’s got role player written all over him #couchGM
After watching the Mavs use “space ball” to take down the Suns……that would be the same thing the Clippers used to take down the Jazz the previous year, rendering Gobert and Ayton less effective, we had better start in on getting our wings. I would be down with Murray or Banchero….don’t know enough about the Kentucky kid but I’d also be prepared to make a decision on Holmgren if he falls, and he might. His frame makes me nervous as hell and I wouldn’t take him over the other top 5ish guys who have been universally listed.
Add 3 wings, guys who can knock the 3 at a decent rate and play D with switchability and we are off and running to the playoffs. I think some people are overthinking Murray’s abilities. I’d be good with Banchero too. Would love Jabari Smith to fall……maybe teams fall in love with Ivey and Sharpe and Holmgren.
There is a possibility there.
Add 3 wings, guys who can knock the 3 at a decent rate and play D with switchability and we are off and running to the playoffs. I think some people are overthinking Murray’s abilities. I’d be good with Banchero too. Would love Jabari Smith to fall……maybe teams fall in love with Ivey and Sharpe and Holmgren.
There is a possibility there.
I would say don't draft Ivey because he's redundant. Maybe a cheaper Fox at this stage. Can he be better in 3 years? Is that worth dealing with a sulky non-productive guy you've maxed out? This isn't 2018.
But that said, I am sure they can trade Fox for pennies on the dollar. Just not at a premium.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
What if we draft Keegan and he doesn't want to play for us so Kris just takes his place?
(sorry)
(sorry)
Maxi Kleber being the lynchpin to the Mavs closing set should tell us everything we need to know about where basketball is. You just flat out need long-rangy forwards that can switch the PnR
Misquote. He said he's not high on Keegan Murray. He sees him as a player that should be taken at the back of the lottery.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
I listened to the pod as well, and while the post you quote isn’t quite correct, it was later clarified, which fits what I heard:
Sac.Kings
All-Star
If the top 3 picks stay as most mocks have them come draft night, I’d like to see us draft Sharpe. I don’t think we have a true #1 on offense. Fox is too inconsistent and Sabonis really should be treated as the glue on offense (shoot, pass, cut, etc.). Sharpe could be our major offensive weapon and does possess all the skills necessary to become a real top tier weapon in today’s NBA. I would say he’s right up there with the highest ceilings, but he’s also a major unknown. No significant competition at all recently, but if he had played and played well, we wouldn’t have a prayer of drafting him at 4.
I don’t think Murray is a bad player at all, but even though he’s the best fit, you always go for the moon in these situations. Unless of course you find yourself a very willing trade partner… we are in a good spot and hold all the cards. Let’s hope we don’t screw it up.
I don’t think Murray is a bad player at all, but even though he’s the best fit, you always go for the moon in these situations. Unless of course you find yourself a very willing trade partner… we are in a good spot and hold all the cards. Let’s hope we don’t screw it up.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
The quote is “ I’ve had conversations with people inside these walls that believe this a 3 man draft. I don’t believe the Kings are as high on Keegan Murray as people on the outside are.“.
he seems to insinuate that through those conversations he surmised the Kings weren’t interested, at least at 4
Likely, but still not a bad idea to keep the meeting, particularly if there is a thought of trading down.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
Right. More information the better. They should be meeting with, working out, and evaluating as many prospects as possible. You never know what deals might manifest themselves.
- Status
Similar threads
